Talk:Mole

Unit

About the SI unit I think that:

• `amount of substance' does not refer to number of particles. The quantity is perfectly valid without the concept of atoms. The law of multiple proportions and law of definite proportions suffice. It is therefore more elegant to define the mole without refering to number of particles, but as a unit ``equivalent proportion.

• The number of atoms in mole should still of course be mentioned. In fact as something that makes marvelously sense in the light of those laws.

If there are no objections I will change the page and come with more proposals. RitaBijlsma

Yes..... Kichumanna (talk) 16:32, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Which of these makes more sense??

1. Move Mole (animal) to Mole and Mole to Mole (disambiguation)
2. Move Mole (unit) to Mole and Mole to Mole (disambiguation)

66.32.243.1 23:49, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm in favor of making the Mole article refer to Mole (animal). Surely there are far more people who take an interest in moles, the animals, than who even know what a Mole is.

I've tried to add a section on the common misconception that Moles are blind, it occured to me when I was reading a play and the mole was used as an adjective for blindness and deludedness, but because I'm inexperienced I just added on the end of the Trivia section. I think it is really important to talk about such features of the animal.(Ozmo)

I recently was very confused about the Value for a mol that you have on the disambiguation page. It says the vale is approximately 6.02252 × 1023 or 602252000000000000000000(2006 CODATA value). Now my problem is that the CODATA group haven't officially released thier values for this four year period, the numbers aren't due until the end of the year, and they made a statement in 2005 I thought confirming that (I could be wrong). Then I noticed in the article you are using the correct 2002 values. My question is where is the source for the 2006 values, and if it is reputable (which I doubt) then why haven't they been used throughout the main article? (boarvolk9@gmail.com)

go for popularity

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=mole+animal 3,600,000 result http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=mole+unit 3,690,000 result

Derek, take out the crap about Old People being Moles.

I still think mole (animal) to mole and the other moles to disambiguation page. 211.72.108.18 02:48, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Australian slang

Mole is Australian slang for an ugly female - this should be added to the disambig list.Davez621 14:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Do it then; it is a Wiki after all. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 14:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

The aussie slang is spelt moll not mole. Create a wiki about it, but it already has its own entry on the moll disambig page. 211.31.245.139 00:43, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Well now it's spelt both ways. It can't really be helped if people are going to spell it mole, and not moll. It's worth having here, as a lot of people spell the word mole. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 00:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Sauce

What about the sauce?? 75.37.199.71 (talk) 19:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Try here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_(sauce) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.142.38.174 (talk) 05:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

(Animal)

Used as a modifier, means “mole-like”

Mole cricket, Mole-like cricket

Mole crab, Mole-like crab

Mole-shrew, Mole-like shrew

Mole-rat Mole-like rat (rodent)

Used as a modifier, “mole-like” = "subterranean"

Mole skink, subterranean skink

Mole salamander, subterranean salamander

Mole Kingsnake, subterranean kingsnake

Mole lobster, subterranean lobster

Mole viper subterranean viper

When used as the head of the noun phrase, animals is called and thought of mole:

A: Called a mole, but is not a mole

Golden Mole

Marsupial Mole

B: Part one, part another, but on balance, a mole.

Shrew-mole

Shrew mole

duck-mole

Chrisrus (talk) 22:18, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Mole Geography

I have no idea what this has to do with you reverting my last edit. As WP:MOSDAB explicitly states: "The description associated with a link should be kept to a minimum, just sufficient to allow the reader to find the correct link." Clarityfiend (talk) 04:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

The place I was directing you to was end of the talk page of the article mole, but I'll say it again here. Imagine you are a South African or something and you are having trouble with animals in your yard that you call "mole". You want to learn about them, but you don't know that they're called "golden moles", there just "moles" to you. You go to the disambuation page. Which moles are your moles? The easiest way to distinguish them, because their identical in most ways, is to know where you are. If you're in Africa, you go here, if you're in Australia, you go here, if you are in Eurasia/North America, you go here. If you don't know what kind of mole you have geography is the simplest way to direct the reader to find the correct link.

As I've stated before, you don't go to the dab page initially [who types "Mole (disambiguation)"?]. You dig into Mole first. Now that I think about it, the geography's okay; the rest ("similar to but unrelated to Talpidae moles") should go, but I can live with it. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, but if you haven't already, please go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mole#Non-moles and tell Richard how you feel, and bring Silence and Zach and anyone else who might be interested with you, and you can all have it out there. The way I see it, the simplest thing to do is to send everyone who searches for m-o-l-e to this page. Chrisrus (talk) 13:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Main meaning

Does anybody seriously believe the chemistry unit is what most people think of first when they hear the word? IMO it should go into the Other common meanings section. Clarityfiend (talk) 17:39, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, there is no primary topic for the disambiguation page. older ≠ wiser 17:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

This primary topic was chosen based on usage statistics presented at Talk:Mole (animal)#Disambiguation of Mole. The SI unit clearly receives more hits than any other type of mole, including the animal. Unless anyone can present an argument strong enough to counter these stats, I suggest restoring the primary topic. —Zach425 ^talk/contribs 04:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

With the current arrangement of articles, with the disambiguation page located at Mole, there is by definition no primary topic. If you want to try moving the SI unit to Mole, that's a different matter, which I doubt would have much support. It might be possible to formulate things such that the SI unit is listed first after the standard "Mole may refer to:" lede line. I considered how to do this when I made my edit, but I couldn't come up with anything that wasn't overly awkward. older ≠ wiser 04:18, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, good point. I had forgotten that aspect of dab pages. —Zach425 ^talk/contribs 18:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Why not Mole people?

Considering Mole (animal) is included. One could end up here searching for a "Mole" as in the animal or a "Mole" as in a specific type of homeless person. I can understand the films, crickets etc. as not being ambiguous per mosdab, but I wouldn't consider this a partial match. -- œ^™ 08:41, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

There was no evidence at the article mole people that they are commonly called simply "moles", so they were removed along with mole cricket, mole snake, mole this and mole that, because there were too many and the "milk chocolate vs. chocolate milk" thing was invoked. Chrisrus (talk) 13:28, 6 March 2011 (UTC)