Talk:3 (number)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	3 (number) is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, an attempt to standardise coverage of Robotics. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numbers.
Numbers rating:	Start Class	Top Importance
Add comments

This article is part of WikiProject Numbers, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use resource about numbers. Suggestions for improving multiple articles on numbers and related subjects should go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers.

The "third smallest prime number" seems to imply that 1 is prime. By convention, the lowest prime is generally considered to be 2, making 3 the second prime number.

Not just consistency - by mathematical definition, one is not prime since it has only one divisor as opposed to two. R adiant _* 08:38, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)

One may easily define primes in such a way that 1 is included (e.g. defining prime as incomposite). Many elementary math teachers are unsure which definition is the right one (including or excluding 1). Some ancient Greeks apparently considered neither 1 nor 2 to be primes. So, yes, it's a matter of convention, and yes, the convention today is that 1 is not a prime - however, neither is it composite.--Niels Ø 09:00, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)

Oops. Okay, guess I shouldn't be parroting my math teacher overly much. Come to think of it he was also convinced that 0 is not a natural number, and I've heard people claim otherwise :) R adiant _* 17:31, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)

Under 'Science' it states that a triangle has three sides - surely that's maths? 84.66.113.154 01:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Are 3 (band) and Three (band) different entities? AxelBoldt 01:59, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

3 (band) is from 3 and there it didn't say more about it ;-)

According to [1], just 3 (band is probably sufficient.¨

--User:Docu

[edit] Stuff for Wiktionary

I think most of the content under the headers Groups of Three and In Chemistry ought to be moved to Wiktionary, since it's merely a list of words beginning "tri-" and the like. PrimeFan 22:00, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

If they get too large, we could split them off, similar to List of famous pairs. I'm sure Wiktionary might want a copy too. -- User:Docu

[edit] Prefixes for 3

I suggest something must be modified about prefixes for 3. See Talk:Tri- for details. 66.245.127.59 22:28, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

3 → AD 3 and 3 (number) → 3 – {This actually sounds more natural with numbers under 100; does anyone ever say "This happened in 3"?? Georgia guy 13:23, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oppose --Philip Baird Shearer 21:27, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
On grounds of consistency, oppose the move. It has been generally established that ### refers to a year, and ### (number) refers to a number. R adiant _* 08:37, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)
Oppose this would be contrary to a well-established convention and make this year inconsistant with all others. Jonathunder 18:36, 2005 Apr 25 (UTC)
Oppose. - Jshadias 13:51, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support. There are far more links to the number than the year. Fredrik | talk 16:53, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. violet/riga (t) 12:26, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. This is a big change that affects anyone editing articles on the first decade of the common era. It should be discussed and agreed at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) first.
Qualified support - It's true that there are far more links to each digit than to the respective years. I agree that this should be discussed at the MoS first. I don't think we should make one or the other the bare page; and certainly don't think we need to tackle the "3 AD" vs. "AD 3" vs. "AD is a criminal imposition of Christianity on my religion-neutral reading experience!" . Instead, I propose

a) 3 (year) as the page for the year content, matching other disambiguation titles (since this *is* about disambiguation)

b) having 3 redirect to 3 (year), for the sake of supporting auto-year-formatting

c) making the links to the number (and the dab page, if there is a separate one) clear ata the top of the year article.
- - see my proposal on the style guide talk page. +sj +

[edit] Discussion of suggested move

All the other digits are in the format "n (number)":

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 →

List of numbers — Integers

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 →

change all (which would be a VERY BIG project) or none.

Certainly it would mean changing them all. It's not such a big project; and the Wikipedia:WikiProject Numbers team is fairly active. +sj + 20:31, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

BTW are you familiar that using a "|" within a link eg [[3 (number)|]] it comes out as 3 not as 3 (number)? -- Philip Baird Shearer 21:27, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Of course it's all or none, so in the following, "3" could be replaced by any of the numbers 1-99. For consistency, I think it is reasonable to leave the number articles where they are (i.e. 3 (number)), but I agree that one rarely would refer to year 3 simply as "3" (where as year 2005 naturally could be referred to as "2005"). I think it would make sense either to move the year articles to 3 (year), making the article named just 3 a disambiguation page, or (probably a better idea:) to have a standardized text highlighted on top of all these pages, something like

This article is about the year 3 AD - for other uses of the number 3, see 3 (number).

I have checked some of the pages in question (i.e. 1-99), and they already have a reference to 3 (number) (or equivalently), but it would be neater if the text also clarified what the 3 article itself is about. --Niels Ø 07:44, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Decision

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. Not a chance that we should move one and not the rest - therefore this is the incorrect place to discuss it. violet/riga (t) 12:26, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The right place to discuss this is Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Rename articles in first decade of the common era?. Gdr 14:27, 2005 Apr 29 (UTC)

[edit] disambiguation

a lot of the information under "in other fields" should be moved to 3(disambiguation) page. some already has,such as three stooges.This information does not belong in a page refering to the number 3 in itself.

[edit] This is odd

Surely there should be some mention that 3 is odd. Or the first odd prime. Or Something.

I think there should be some mention of how... there's this natural tendency to make the number of something three. Whenever you're making a point, it sounds best to make three of them.. and other instances like that... and 'counting to three' and such.

Yes, entirely. To some degree this is a systemic cultural preference: three is favoured in most European cultures, for instance, whereas some Native American traditions (e.g. the Lakota?) prefer four and use it in many contexts analogous to our three (IIRC). I'm not quite sure what to say about this, though. I'll add something on counting to three. 4pq1injbok 05:47, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Three Primary Colors

[edit] Three Graces

[edit] Past Present and Future

Three divisions of time

[edit] Pi

Should there be some mention of the false proofs (or wrong assumption) that 3 is Pi? Well, the ratio of a sircumference to diameter.

[edit] three

Just remember: "stoppest thou not at two, and if thou should count onward to three, proceedeth thou not onward to four." Monty python's rules for the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch. --DanielCD 22:17, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] fairy tales

three good fairies, three wishes, three days to guess rumpelstiltskins name, three bears, three blind mice, etc...

[edit] Threesome

I changed the definition of a threesome from "one man and two women" to "three people", as I think it's more correct. You can definitely have a threesome between two men and a woman, or three men, etc. I didn't think anyone would object, but just in case, I'm explaining it here. --Sbrools ^{(talk . contribs)} 21:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Lord of the Rings

I removed The Lord of the Rings from the trilogy part because it is not a trilogy. It happened to be released in three books but that is not the way it is written nor Tolkien's wish. It is to be considered as one book of 6 separate books.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:SicilyFlag.gif

Image:SicilyFlag.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Three laws of robotics

Add a mention of science fiction ...? This is a pretty widely quoted and understood term. PennaBoy 21:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pound Symbol

When I type shift + 3 I get #, which is called the pound symbol. This is typical of all US keyboards. Yes, I know the symbol is different in the UK, but it has the same name and same key. how should this be dealt with? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rds865 (talk • contribs) 05:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure its the pound symbol on the phone, on a keyboard it is the number symbol, either way, I fail to see what that has to do with with the number three. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.207.191 (talk) 06:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Religion and myth

The religions and myth part is a little over done. Half of it is the Greek version followed by the Roman version, wouldn't it be easier to to list Zeus, Jupiter, Poseidon, Neptune, Hades and Pluto together? In addition to that, theres nothing noteworthy or religious about a trident, even a God's trident, having three points, infact, I think thats what TRIdent means. The weapon and its characteristics are not unique to him, they probably have more to do with a fishing spear being more effective with more prongs, so Retiarius can't even definitively be said to be related to Neptune. Additionally, those three were not Gods of Heaven, Earth and the Underworld, but of Heaven (or Air if you take a Classical Elemental look), Water and Earth, the elements in which they primarily dwelt as was decided after Zeus beat his father. Hades had as much control over the metals hidden in the earth as he did over the dead (if not more, less rules with shinies, a lot of rules with the uglies). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.137.207.191 (talk) 06:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] sex

have it!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.116.245.241 (talk) 13:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.