Template talk:Log(x)
Add topicLatest comment: 7 months ago by Vanisaac in topic Why not just use ln(x)?
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
I would like to change
This article uses technical mathematical notation for logarithms. All instances of log(x) without a subscript base should be interpreted as a natural logarithm, commonly notated as ln(x) or loge(x).
to replace "commonly" with "also commonly". This acknowledges that log(x) is common, wheras the existing language makes it seem as if log(x) is being used in lieu of the common notation. I'd boldly make this edit myself, but since this is a template, I will first seek discussion. —Quantling (talk | contribs) 20:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- I changed my mind and am going to edit boldly. If I've erred and you change my edit, please also give a detailed reason here. Thank you —Quantling (talk | contribs) 21:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Why not just use ln(x)?
[edit]If this needs clarification, wouldn't it be better to just use an unambiguous notation throughout the body of the article? — Sonata Green(talk) 01:05, 9 February 2026 (UTC)
- Because different fields use logarithmic notation differently, and per Wikipedia guidelines, articles concerning topics in those fields should reflect how logarithmic notation is used in the publications and scholarship of that field. This template exists precisely because articles DO use unambiguous notation throughout their body, you just can't follow content guidelines and also maintain unambiguous notation between articles. "Just using ln(x)" still leaves ambiguity as to what "log(x)" means in any other articles, and it violates content guidelines. VanIsaac, GHTV contrabout 02:08, 9 February 2026 (UTC)