Talk:−40 (number)

This article was nominated for deletion on 15 October 2004. The result of the discussion was keep.

Notable ?

Should this really have its own article? Wikipedia:WikiProject_Numbers suggests that facts about -N should be mentioned on the page for +N. And this is a particularly short and stubby article. 4pq1injbok 02:39, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

No comments? I'm about to move this to 40 and redirect, then. 4pq1injbok 03:45, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Please don't

I just did some real work. Superm401 03:59, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Minus/Negative

My understanding is that rather than reading "Minus Forty", it should read "Negative Forty" since minus is a binary operator and negative is a unary operator. "Minus forty" is certainly dominant in common usage, but I believe it to be incorrect. Anyone? Macho Philipovich 21:40, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this. Minus means subtraction, not negativity. 24.146.8.72 14:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge (2007)

This information should be merged with 40, I will do it if there is no objection.--Cronholm144 21:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly- no this article shouldn't be merged with 40. The whole point of this article is to point out where the temperature scales converge. Which isn't at +40. The question you have to ask is whether reading this info under the entry for +40 would confuse. I'm certain it will.

Secondly- I'm not sure where this idiom of 'negative 40' exists, but I cannot imagine anybody saying it in place of 'minus 40'. Is the 'negative' idiom American? If so, please consider that English is a global language and that many native speakers might not be familiar with Americanisms, if that is the case. If people say "minus 40", why change it to something else. We must keep entries in places where people can find it. It's not the sort of thing that I can imagine causing much, if any, confusion.

This is a single fact article and we can do a redirect directly to the information about negative forty (ie directly to a subheading "-40") if that is what they enter into the search engine, WP:NUMBERS policy would seem to have jurisdiction here.
Negative forty and minus forty imply two different things. Negative forty implies "the opposite of forty" minus forty implies "40 subtracted from something". I don't think American English vs. British English is a factor here. —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 23:17, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge (2011)

Firstly, see WP:NUM, and secondly, see WP:1729. Having only 1 interesting property (which is already duplicated at Fahrenheit) is not enough for -40 to merit a separate article (and besides, the style of writing is very unencyclopedic). I think this should be merged with 40 (number). Lanthanum-138 (talk) 07:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merged (it was even already duplicated at 40 (number)). Negative numbers are usually just not notable enough (the exception probably being -1). Lanthanum-138 (talk) 07:31, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:−40 (number)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

; Quality

Article is developing, provides some meaningful content, but is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources.

Importance

Contributes more specific or less significant details.

Assessed by Joshua Issac (talk) on 19:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 19:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 05:20, 13 May 2016 (UTC)