|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fahrenheit article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2|
|Fahrenheit has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Science, Physics. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Which of you snarky assholes decided to put the "map of countries with Fahrenheit??"
- I do not really see a problem with it. It says the same thing as "Only the United States and its territories use the Fahrenheit scale.", and possibly more effectively for readers that pick up information better from graphics than text. VQuakr (talk) 03:16, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
It's worth noting that the map is actually wrong. The UK, for instance, reports weather temperatures in Farenheit on one side of freezing and Celcius on the other. Silly, but there it is: At least two countries (one unmarked on the map) use Farenheit. IMHO F should be toast, but reality disagrees. Riventree (talk) 07:32, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
I propose the incorrect map be removed until a correct one is produced.
- Thats not really true about the UK. Offically we use the celsius scale with the temperatures in fahrenheit often given as a supplement - just look at any weather information for the UK. The reason for this is that many older people still have a better idea of what temperatures mean in fahrenheit. Sometimes newspapers will talk about high summer temperatures in fahrenheit because they delight in hyperbole and it sounds hotter that way, but this is getting less common. As the older generation disappears the use of farenheit will go altogether, along with pounds and ounces and feet and inches as younger people will have little use for, or understanding of these terms. Having said that I can't see much point in having a world map that shows farenheit being used in two countries - you can say that in one sentence. Richerman (talk) 15:44, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Request to incorporate/improve important utility urgently
Please incorporate a table (preferably) like https://www.infoplease.com/science-health/weights-measures/fahrenheit-and-celsius-centigrade-scales but from the wider range like absolute zero (-273 deg celsius~-459 deg fahrenheit) to preferably 200 deg C (~392 deg F), or else at least a more easy to visually compare the scales in an image format (but better than than 2 already used for the article) (like http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/glossary/temperature_scale.html) for the same wider scale requested above.
- Does Conversion of units of temperature have what you want? SpinningSpark 11:55, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
You are right - its already there in the url https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_of_units_of_temperature.
I wish, however, that this url link could be placed inside the section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#Usage. Secondly, the url given in the section https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahrenheit#See_also could either include the urls: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_of_units_of_temperature#Comparison and 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_of_units_of_temperature#Graphical_representation or else just keep that webpage url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_of_units_of_temperature. The reason that the above 2 urls have more complete info to what is being requested.
Thanks for the link. I guess I could have also found that link myself had I done more labour than just looking for what was upfront visible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fahrenheit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100926162224/http://hypertextbook.com/facts/LenaWong.shtml to http://hypertextbook.com/facts/LenaWong.shtml
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/W-6/page-2.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
You may set the
|checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting
|needhelp= to your help request.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
If you are unable to use these tools, you may set
|needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.
From Rømer's scale to Fahrenheit
I made some quick calculation, and I found the history of the derivation of the Fahrenheit scale from the Rømer's one implausible. It a quadruplication of values is performed and then data is tweaked so that water freezes at 32 degrees instead of 30, water would boil at near 250 °F, not 212. Moreover 22.5 °Rø is too low a temperature for the human body: 27.5 °Rø is more acceptable.
I believe that if the story is true Fahrenheit came with 30 °F and 110 °F for freezing water and body temperature and then tweaked it to 32 °F and 96 °F respectively so that this interval was a power of 2. Do you know of any source which may confirm of deny it? --.mau. ✉ 21:02, 7 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by .mau. (talk • contribs)
- Why would we look for sources to support your conjectures and WP:OR? The article has what appears to be a very solid source for the derivation as given (https://openlibrary.org/books/OL16843401M/The_mechanical_universe). Why don't you get a copy of it and verify it yourself? I don't have that book but I do have a history of metrology book somewhere and as I remember it largely agrees with the history as given. Meters (talk) 21:35, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
- Ok. It's a fact that Fahrenheit started with a scale where 0 is the bottom, 7½ degrees is the temperature at which water freezes and 22½ degrees is the body temperature. But it is also a fact that this cannot possibly be the Rømer scale where water boiles at 60 degrees; when Fahrenheit multiplies 7½ and 22½ by four, getting 30 and 90 degrees, boiling water would boil at 240 degrees; tweaking the two values to 32 and 96 would put boiling water temperature at 256 degrees, and setting it at 212 is not "somewhat inaccurate". Besides, the article says that brine freezes at zero, water freezes and melts at 7.5 degrees, body temperature is 22.5, and water boils at 60 degrees. and this is plain wrong, unless Rømer scale is not linear. Just do the proportions and look out which is body temperature in Fahrenheit or Celsius.
- I have an idea about what could have happened; but since conjectures are not welcome - and I agree with this, by the way - I won't state it. I however urge somebody with a better command of English than I have to reformulate that paragraph using the actual source and without making any conjecture about the body temperature in Rømer scale. --.mau. ✉ 20:10, 9 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by .mau. (talk • contribs)