Talk:72 (number)

Untitled

nevermind 72.66.249.231 15:13, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Wrong Field?

wouldn't the number of hours in three days be an astronomical example? I personally think so but i wanted to make sure before i put it in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DerBarJude (talk • contribs) 16:30, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

GTA4

Someone mention the 24 spoof in GTA4 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.67.88 (talk) 18:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

---

There should be a mention of the DTP point here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.87.151.1 (talk) 15:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

72 is not a highly composite number

72 is not a highly composite number: See the article on highly composite number, which lists the first dozen highly composite numbers and 72 is not in this list.

Note that "highly composite number" is NOT some phrase to be used on a whim, but rather there is a technical definition of this concept. 98.67.171.23 (talk) 04:05, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Also, it has 12 divisors, not 11. The smallest number with exactly 11 divisors is 1024. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 11:28, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.ngcic.org/
  • In IC 1337 on 2011-04-23 17:08:25, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
  • In IC 1337 on 2011-04-24 04:34:10, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
  • In 10 (number) on 2011-05-23 02:06:58, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
  • In 10 (number) on 2011-05-31 22:27:07, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
  • In 11 (number) on 2011-06-01 02:53:15, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
  • In 138 (number) on 2011-06-01 14:55:19, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
  • In 48 (number) on 2011-06-19 14:01:14, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
  • In 52 (number) on 2011-06-19 20:05:38, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'

--JeffGBot (talk) 21:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/SEsaros/SEsaros1-175.html
  • In 138 (number) on 2011-05-23 02:57:59, 404 Not Found
  • In 138 (number) on 2011-06-01 14:55:24, 404 Not Found
  • In 159 (number) on 2011-06-01 18:16:47, 404 Not Found
  • In 48 (number) on 2011-06-19 14:03:15, 404 Not Found
  • In 53 (number) on 2011-06-19 20:09:35, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 21:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 3

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/LEsaros/LEsaros1-175.html
  • In 10 (number) on 2011-05-23 02:07:31, 404 Not Found
  • In 1520s BC on 2011-05-23 03:34:42, 404 Not Found
  • In 1630s BC on 2011-05-25 01:51:51, 404 Not Found
  • In 10 (number) on 2011-05-31 22:27:15, 404 Not Found
  • In 11 (number) on 2011-06-01 02:53:24, 404 Not Found
  • In 1409–1400 BC on 2011-06-01 15:26:12, 404 Not Found
  • In 159 (number) on 2011-06-01 18:16:53, 404 Not Found
  • In 48 (number) on 2011-06-19 14:03:06, 404 Not Found
  • In 53 (number) on 2011-06-19 20:09:29, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 21:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Municipal Okrug 72

Why is this important enough for this article? Unless you can justify an article on Municipal Okrug 72, I don't think you can justify a line in this article. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:05, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Because this is the top level municipal division of a federal city (a federal subject of Russia)? Just because the article on this particular municipal okrug does not yet exist doesn't mean it's not notable (and red links on dab pages are fine as long as they meet WP:DABRL). We have plenty of existing articles about other municipal okrugs in St. Petersburg already; cf. Kolomna, Sennoy, Rybatskoye, #7, #65, etc., all of which are on the same exact level of hierarchy and whose notability has never been contested. Does this alleviate your concerns? Note this is explicitly not a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument; what we are dealing here is an entity from the set of objects whose notability is pretty obvious upon even a perfunctory inspection and where WP:GEOLAND applies (populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 12, 2017; 13:55 (UTC)

Not all notable things containing "72" necessarily belong in this article; California's 72nd State Assembly district comes to mind.

"Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable" doesn't apply (in the US) to things such as zip codes and city and county electoral districts. It apparently does apply to some "neighborhoods" which are not legally recognized. If a "federal city" is more analogous to a US state than a US city or county, you might have a point. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm really not sure why the State Assembly district shouldn't be included here as well, but am not overly concerned with that. If that's because it's technically "72nd", not "72", that's fine, although that seems kinda nitpicky. As a reader, I'd fully expect to find it on this page (well, technically, on 72 (disambiguation), not on 72 (number), but I understand this page hasn't been properly split/cleaned up yet), even if it's only under "see also".

With this particular municipal okrug, however, it's not that the title contains 72, it's that "72" is the actual name of the okrug. The "municipal okrug" part is there as an entity qualifier, same way as "river" is an entity qualifier for the Volga River ("Volga" isn't just contained there, it's the actual name). It's just one of the ways to disambiguate things—if you normalize these to standard disambiguation scheme, you'll get "72 (municipal okrug)", "Volga (river)", and maybe even "72 (California's State Assembly district)", but this is just not how the applicable naming conventions are structured (but that's also fine).

Anyway, to your core point, yes, "federal city" is indeed more analogous to a US state than to a US city. Russia is divided into 83 (85, including the two on the contested Crimean peninsula) constituent entities ("federal subjects", roughly equivalent to US states), and a "federal city" is a type of a federal subject. If you need further clarifications, I'll be happy to oblige. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); June 13, 2017; 15:59 (UTC)

Bingo names -

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers#List of British bingo nicknames for a centralized discusion as to whether Bingo names should be included in thiese articles. Arthur Rubin (alternate) (talk) 23:34, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Municipal Okrugs of Saint Petersburg

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers#Municipal Okrugs of Saint Petersburg for a centralized discusion as to whether Municipal Okrugs of Saint Petersburg should be included in these pages. Certes (talk) 11:57, 4 June 2018 (UTC)