Template talk:SI base quantities

Physics Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

What exactly is the point of the line "The quantity (not the unit) can have a specification: T_max = 300 K"?--Srleffler (talk) 03:32, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can't quite figure that out. I suspect few will find it to illuminate anything. Which is a good reason to remove it. —Quondum 04:02, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see what it's saying now: you can't put subscripts like "max" on the units, only on the symbol for the quantity. Usage tips like this don't belong in a navigation template. They belong even less when the usage tip is off-topic. This template covers base quantitites, not base units.--Srleffler (talk) 03:13, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

—Quondum 04:19, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This has way too much content for a navigation template. I'm inclined to prune it by about half. This template, per its name, should focus on base quantities. What I have in mind is:

• Keep the "Base quantity" table, but kill the "example" column.
• Remove "Specification"
• Remove "Derived quantity"
• Keep the graphic
• Keep "See also"

Comments?--Srleffler (talk) 03:26, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed on all count, except that the graphic could be jettisoned too. —Quondum 04:02, 5 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, done. I kept the graphic but switched to the version without the arrows, since I suspect they will no longer be correct after the 2019 redefinition goes into effect.--Srleffler (talk) 03:11, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Correct or not, arrows don't belong in the graphic in the template at all: they are peripheral information. In the new SI, the arrows are somewhat arbitrary anyway; for example, the metre could have been defined in terms of the wavelength of the transition radiation of caesium. —Quondum 04:19, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]