I have rearranged the box to express this; if anyone sees any exceptions, they can always do something about it, but none of the ledes suggested that any of these classes were of interest beyond the challenge of finding their members or some satisfaction that some number has such a property. I suppose that some, such as repunits are moderately interesting polynomials, but I saw nothing to make me hesitate long. PJTraill (talk) 20:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I have added repunits to the polynomials, as they are such and tie in with others. They now occur twice, but I don’t see that as a problem. PJTraill (talk) 22:58, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I see that user:MagistraMundi has added Pancake number to Template:Classes_of_natural_numbers, as a link to Pancake sorting, which does not however seem to define “Pancake number”. Perhaps it would be helpful if he (or someone else) were to create the page Pancake number as a redirect to Pancake sorting#Pancake number, to ensure that that anchor refers to a definitions in that article and to link Template:Classes_of_natural_numbers to the new page. All presuming pancake numbers really are sufficiently notable! PJTraill (talk) 21:58, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

(sorry, thought I'd replied on the 25th but must've forgot to save the page) I've tried to adjust the introduction of pancake sorting so that "pancake number" is meaningful. I think they are notable: for one thing, it's counter-intuitive that they should be so hard to calculate. And if we've got vampire numbers, it's good to extend the gustatory/nutritional theme. MagistraMundi (talk) 09:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Someone should fix the layout of the template. The left-hand side with the sub-category names is not wide enough to fit nicely on most resolutions. Also, I've noticed this is a theme with templates of this nature. If someone has any expertise on the subject, please leave a comment or contribute. Unfortunately I do not know enough about templating to help at the moment. Thanks. 137.124.161.51 (talk) 21:35, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

@David Eppstein: I see you have been fighting Canute-like against the rising tide in the form of waves of futile number classes! Perhaps there is hope and we can more effectively declutter this, {{prime number classes}} (where I see Repunit, Self number &c!), {{Divisor classes}} and perhaps {{Series (mathematics)}}.
These ideas occur to me:

• Create a template, e.g. {{Recreational number classes}} and use it rather than this on the pages of such classes. Of course it can include a see also for this.
  • This would naturally divert similar additions to the new template.
  • A sufficiently dedicated person could browse through the revision histories and find even more to stuff in that template!
• Let this say see also {{Recreational number classes}} or similar and [ cut them all out | limit them to [ one line ¿on whose screen? | some number ] | if feasible, transclude that in an initially hidden sub-box ].
  • The advantage of transcluding them would be to satisfy those whom these classes interest, so they have less incentive to spam elsewhere.
• Add an HTML comments begging people not to add more to the more serious templates but to put them in {{Recreational number classes}}.

I fear I do not have time for any of this at the moment, but I would be interested in any discussion. PJTraill (talk) 21:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)