Talk:17 (number)

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Numbers Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numbers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Numbers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NumbersWikipedia:WikiProject NumbersTemplate:WikiProject NumbersNumbers Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Mathematics Mid‑priority This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-priority on the project's priority scale.

What about edge of seventeen?! *Shock*

reference for a 17 factoid I intend to add: Berlekamp, E. R. and Graham, R. L., Irregularities in the distributions of finite sequences, J. Number Theory 2 (1970), 152–161. (example 63) 4pq1injbok 22:55, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I have removed the unexplained globalization tag from the "Age 17" section. Whenever you place a {{globalize}} tag on an article, please also take a minute to explain your concerns on the article's talk page. Is something specific missing? This will help other editors figure out what your actual concerns are. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I was in college there was some kind of a shaggy dog story/joke circulating about why 17 was the only random number. This story seemed to be very popular amongst math majors. I don't remember exactly how it went. Still, I think it would be nice if someone would put it up here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.163.161 (talk) 02:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Throughout the page it says that 17 is the most and least random number. It even says MIT stated it is the most random number, then later in the article states MIT claimed 17 was the least random number. WHAT?--Phillies9513 (talk) 00:36, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's an "inside" joke. Bearian (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

17 is the "most" random number because it is chosen "more" often, and "least random" number because being chosen more often that makes it less random. Two faces of the same coin. Also, evidence of a shortcoming of the english language. When we simplify what we are trying to say, opposite meanings can be understood.Dhrm77 (talk) 15:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The relation of the number 17 to Random Hall (MIT) is not relevant to this article. Power~enwiki (talk) 06:27, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This factoid is the only reason why I would actually visit a Wikipedia page on the number 17. I think this fun fact should be moved to the top. (Jono) 24 May 2021

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 17 (number). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100529015856/http://scienceblogs.com:80/cognitivedaily/2007/02/is_17_the_most_random_number.php to http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2007/02/is_17_the_most_random_number.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:06, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rescued link doesn't work. Not needed anyway. Removed: [1]. - DVdm (talk) 08:15, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

link restored and moved to external link section. Wayback template used before is not meant to be used for citations. Graphs shown in article are not found in other references, and can be found interesting. Especially the fact that 7 was the second highest choice of random number. The article doesn't explain why 17 is prefered when asked for a random number from 1 to 20. There is a simple explanation. When asked for a random number between 1 and 10, 7 is the favorite. When given a range of 1 to 20, people take advantage of the extension and add 10 (our usual counting base), picking therefore more often 17. Similarly, 37 is the favorite (adding 30 to 7) when the range is 1 to 100. I wonder what the favorite would be in the range of 1 to 1000. Dhrm77 (talk) 15:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The movie is 117 minutes long as claimed on the DVD and Blue-Ray...in the beginning when the computer is reading some text, the number 17 is in the text, and Condor was 17 minutes late getting to the office... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.118.28.10 (talk) 06:08, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:PRESERVE, here is the list of retired #17 jersey numbers and racecars that were mentioned in the article:

• The jersey number 17 has been retired by several North American sports teams in honor of past playing greats or other key figures:
  • In Major League Baseball:
    • The St. Louis Cardinals, for Hall of Famer Dizzy Dean, who also had a notable career as a broadcaster for the team.
    • The Colorado Rockies, for Todd Helton (number retired on August 17, 2014).
  • In the NBA:
    • The Boston Celtics, for Hall of Famer John Havlicek.
    • The Golden State Warriors, for Hall of Famer Chris Mullin.
    • The Los Angeles Lakers have not retired #17. However, the team has honored the number for Hall of Famer Jim Pollard, who wore it when the franchise was the Minneapolis Lakers.
  • In the NHL:
    • The Carolina Hurricanes, for Rod Brind'Amour.
    • The Edmonton Oilers, for Hall of Famer Jari Kurri.
  • No NFL team has retired the number.
• The number that footballer Marc-Vivien Foé wore for the French clubs Lens and Lyon, retired by both clubs after his death from heart failure during a semifinal match in the 2003 FIFA Confederations Cup. Foé also wore the 17 shirt for the Cameroon national team at the time of his death.

In motorsport:

• #17 was used by French Formula One driver Jules Bianchi. After his death from injuries sustained in the 2014 Japanese Grand Prix, the number was retired by the FIA
• Dick Johnson made the #17 famous in Australian motor racing circles, winning five Australian Touring Car Championships and three Bathurst 1000's with the number. His team still carries the number today.
• The number of a car in the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series owned by Roush Fenway Racing since 1999, Matt Kenseth has driven the car since its debut in 1999 until 2012. Replacing the number with the traditional Roush #6 for the 2013 season with new driver Ricky Stenhouse Jr. has been considered.
• From 1987 until 2001, Hendrick Motorsports has used #17 for various drivers in the NASCAR Hall of Fame from 1987–90, and for a satellite team from 1991-92. It was also used by the team owner's son, who died in 2004.

This material may be of interest for a future List of retired numbers in sports article. — JFG ^talk 22:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The relationship between 175, 180, and 147 to 17 is demonstrably false, per WP:CALC. Should we note that? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 01:49, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why we're including this at all, if it isn't important enough to mention at Leon Kass. One could make an argument for including that the biblical flood began and ended on the 17th of the month, the rest should probably just be removed and ignored. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Numbers#List of British bingo nicknames for a centralized discusion as to whether Bingo names should be included in thiese articles. Arthur Rubin (alternate) (talk) 23:33, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]