Talk:mAhg−1

RFD discussion: July–October 2020
Do we allow entries for one unit per another unit? Seems like there could be a lot of these if they were allowed, but there are no other unit symbol entries in  and apparently not in   either (though for these I only glanced at the titles and didn't look at the pages for all of them). — Eru·tuon 04:53, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't have thought so. Delete SemperBlotto (talk) 05:19, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * See also Requests_for_deletion/English. Mihia (talk) 10:04, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is another case where I think the rule for chemical formulae should be applied.  It is used in technical literature where readers will know how to separate it into component parts.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 11:29, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep in physics there is no in principle distinction between the strings of unit symbols that make up a compound symbol, eg mAh and the inverse with might be for example ms−1 or km/h. It is not as if there is an unlimited number actually in use, so I think that Wiktionary should cover these inverse compound symbols too. I will concede that mAh/g is in much more common use. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:16, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The number of combinations like, , ..., is also not unlimited, but that is by itself not an argument to keep these. The number of physical units in use is large; just for this same physical quantity the units Ahg−1, mAsg−1, mAhkg−1 and Ahkg−1 are also in use. --Lambiam 13:20, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Weak delete; in context someone will hopefully know how to separate the parts, as with chemical formulas. - -sche (discuss) 16:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * RFD-deleted. I would add that this is simply isn't under a dictionary's purview. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:34, 4 October 2020 (UTC)