Talk:Back-of-the-envelope calculation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why would an envelope so often be at hand? Shouldn't it be called something like napkin-face? Or did this term originate in offices? [not that they don't have notepads.] lysdexia 17:22, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It's a valid term, that's often used (at least it is where I am). You can't dispute an article because you just don't like the phrase it's describing. jguk 22:28, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
It's because of all the junk mail you get, you always have a useless envelope around.

If it's really due to Enrico Fermi, then it presumably originated in a university environment.--Runcorn 19:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Back of the Napkin

There's an article (stub) talking about back of the napkin calculations. I think these should be put into one article somehow. 74.99.19.249 14:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC) Chris

[edit] Merge?

Clearly, this should be merged with Back-of-the-envelope-calculations as it deals with the same subject. I favour turning this article into the redirect, as people usually use the longer phrase. --Runcorn 19:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a strong opinion either way, but maybe Back-of-the-envelope calculation would be a better title (removing the hyphen between "envelope" and "calculation", and dropping the plural "s" in accordance with the MOS). Wmahan. 19:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree with the above comment regarding "s" and hyphens, but otherwise it's catch-as-catch-can. - DavidWBrooks 22:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Wmahan too. --Runcorn 19:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nearest and nearest available

I restored "available". The nearest piece of paper may not be available. It may be an important document, not to be scribbled on.--Runcorn 19:47, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it still strikes me as an unnecessary word - there's no need to cover every possibility in a sentence lik that; we wouldn't say "nearest available piece of paper, parchment or other material capable of holding ink or other writing substance" - but I'm sure we both agree it's not worth an edit war, so I won't re-revert. - DavidWBrooks 22:15, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reference link 404

The reference link for Fermi Questions is 404. PseudoEdit 22:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I removed it. - DavidWBrooks 23:00, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Abbreviation

Does anybody really use the abbreviation BotEC? I've never heard it, and it's incredibly clumsy. Unless it's regularly used, it shouldn't be in the article, and especially not in the lead. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 19:28, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Laffer Curve?

What does this entry have to do with the Laffer Curve and why is it referenced from here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.24.36.195 (talk) 11:00, 19 March 2008 (UTC)