A whole number is any non-negative integer, which includes 0. These numbers are whole numbers: 0, 1, 2, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jszivos (talk • contribs) 21:20, 9 November 2008 (UTC) I agree with you and propose a revert from the current disambiguation page to the article at this version, as its consensus of references show that whole numbers mathematically have stood on their own as set W (the non-negative integers), distinct from the natural numbers N (the positive integers), and the integers Z (all integers). Who is with me? Prepare for dissent from Trovatore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.84.227.12 (talk) 19:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC) Somewhat old response to both of you, but I have an idea to rectify the situation. From the reliable sources point of view, whole number might have reason to stand as an article. The version User:161.84.227.12 pointed out has reliable references and the bulk of which state "whole number" includes 0, 1, 2, 3 .... For the purposes of Wikipedia alone, this reason is enough to keep "whole number" as an article. The other alternative is to redirect to natural number and merge the content there, or to explain "whole number" and the related concepts there.174.3.125.23 (talk) 18:38, 30 August 2014 (UTC) An actual article about "whole numbers" is the absolute worst possible solution. There is nothing whatsoever to say about whole numbers that isn't just talking about natural numbers (or integers, for those who use the term that way). I am personally OK with a redirect to natural number. I think everything else can be explained at that article. However there's at least one contributor who doesn't think that gives enough prominence to the "integer" meaning. --Trovatore (talk) 02:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC) natural number explains it sufficiently. We note that "whole number" is a synonym, and that should be sufficient. Any further discussion on "whole number" can be made on natural number including its use in nonscholarly literature.174.3.125.23 (talk) 20:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC) That's fine with me. --Trovatore (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC) I am going to post a note on talk:natural number for the implementation.174.3.125.23 (talk) 05:44, 1 September 2014 (UTC) A whole number is any non-negative integer, which includes 0. These numbers are whole numbers: 0, 1, 2, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jszivos (talk • contribs) 21:20, 9 November 2008 (UTC) I agree with you and propose a revert from the current disambiguation page to the article at this version, as its consensus of references show that whole numbers mathematically have stood on their own as set W (the non-negative integers), distinct from the natural numbers N (the positive integers), and the integers Z (all integers). Who is with me? Prepare for dissent from Trovatore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.84.227.12 (talk) 19:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC) Somewhat old response to both of you, but I have an idea to rectify the situation. From the reliable sources point of view, whole number might have reason to stand as an article. The version User:161.84.227.12 pointed out has reliable references and the bulk of which state "whole number" includes 0, 1, 2, 3 .... For the purposes of Wikipedia alone, this reason is enough to keep "whole number" as an article. The other alternative is to redirect to natural number and merge the content there, or to explain "whole number" and the related concepts there.174.3.125.23 (talk) 18:38, 30 August 2014 (UTC) An actual article about "whole numbers" is the absolute worst possible solution. There is nothing whatsoever to say about whole numbers that isn't just talking about natural numbers (or integers, for those who use the term that way). I am personally OK with a redirect to natural number. I think everything else can be explained at that article. However there's at least one contributor who doesn't think that gives enough prominence to the "integer" meaning. --Trovatore (talk) 02:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC) natural number explains it sufficiently. We note that "whole number" is a synonym, and that should be sufficient. Any further discussion on "whole number" can be made on natural number including its use in nonscholarly literature.174.3.125.23 (talk) 20:09, 31 August 2014 (UTC) That's fine with me. --Trovatore (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC) I am going to post a note on talk:natural number for the implementation.174.3.125.23 (talk) 05:44, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Tags: blogs, awesome, daily life, instant, lifestyle, printed materials, everyday goods