|
Please sign your posts with ~~~~
|
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 65: |
Line 65: |
| There is (another) spelling error: mammology instead of mammalogy | | There is (another) spelling error: mammology instead of mammalogy |
| [[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.76|172.68.110.76]] 09:48, 10 May 2018 (UTC) | | [[Special:Contributions/172.68.110.76|172.68.110.76]] 09:48, 10 May 2018 (UTC) |
− |
| |
− | Regarding the spelling of "mammology" - do you think it was intentional and Randall meant ''mammo-'' female breast ''-logy'' the study of?
| |
− | [https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mammo-#English mammo- prefix on wiktionary]
| |
− | --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.46|108.162.216.46]] 21:18, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
| |
− | The size is slightly larger than that of Presidents, and I don't know any women whose breasts are larger than a President. Although the term is preceeded by the word "marine", so we're not talking about humans. Maybe female blue whales have breasts that are larger than the size of an entire human. (That could be of interest to the porn industry.)[[Special:Contributions/162.158.59.4|162.158.59.4]] 00:56, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | The explanation about railway engineering is incorrect. Whereas every railway has ''a'' standard gauge, "standard-gauge rail" has a specific meaning of a track with rails 1435mm (4 ft 8.5 in) apart. Anything narrower than that is described as a narrow-gauge line by rail technicians and enthusiasts, even if it is the standard gauge for a particular rail network. Where I live in New Zealand, for example, the country's standard gauge of 3 ft 6 in means that the country's rail network uses a narrow-gauge track. I've amended the text accordingly. [[User:Grutness|Grutness]] ([[User talk:Grutness|talk]]) 02:58, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | I think the title text is actually a reference to [[wikipedia:Combinatorics|combinatorics]], which is a subfield of mathematics. --cajsq0228 20:52, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | I really wonder where History a la [[1979: History]] would be - I'm honestly surprised he didn't include it in this graph... (?) I think I'd personally try to place it somewhere between right above Black Hole and off the right side of the chart (95%-120% | 20%) -- [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 19:50, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | I'm sorry, but someone has to say this - as I understand, science is based on empirical evidence. Empirically, we have a very good idea of the number of deities; that number is zero. Theology should be in the far top-right corner. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.63|172.71.242.63]] 14:44, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
| |