From this page, enormabixul equals 200![200(2)200], which equals enormaxul and inconsistent with this page. {hyp/^,cos} (talk) 11:38, August 21, 2017 (UTC)
- I think Hollom forgot to put an extra (2)200 in the enormabixul, enormatrixul and enormaquaxul groups of numbers in his number list. -- ☁ I want more clouds! ⛅ 13:24, August 21, 2017 (UTC)
- In addition, some of the definitions in the articles (such as Bisuperior Enormatrixul and the Enormaquaxul group) appears to be incorrect. -- ☁ I want more clouds! ⛅ 13:30, August 21, 2017 (UTC)