ProofCreature
Joined 16 February 2023
Latest comment: 10 months ago by ProofCreature in topic Consensus
After the Gold Rush
editHi, You recently reverted my edit on After the Gold Rush, with the album ratings template. However, the template is now known as music rating Majash2020 (talk) 15:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- Where did you learn about the template's name change, @Majash2020? ProofCreature (talk) 15:30, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- If you search the template on Wikipedia, it will redirect you to Music ratings. Search "Template:Music ratings". I believe it's a recent change Majash2020 (talk) 17:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Mercantilism
editI'm not sure what your intention was with this edit, but you stripped the short description template, image, and entire article lede from the article.-- Ponyobons mots 22:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, that was entirely a mistake. ProofCreature (talk) 23:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Consensus
edit...conversation continued from here...
- I'm curious about your requirements for consensus, statistically, factually. What is an appropriate proportion that validates a consensus? How many and from what common pool is it taken (i.e. what common denominator)?
- ProofCreature (talk) 21:05, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- I don't have any special "requirements"; I just stay open to what I am hearing in a discussion, the strength of the argumentation, and the ability to link that argumentation to the policies and guidelines of the encyclopedia. I'm afraid I cannot reduce it to a tidy little equation of this many statistics plus that many facts minus them there oppositions and expostulations divided by !votes. It's just something that comes with experience here. Mathglot (talk) 21:37, 10
- I get it. It explains some comments. It is certainly easier and is not uncommon.
- An echo chamber isn't a consensus. It can be difficult to recognize.
- Maybe next week I'll research accepted statistics to determine consensus. If I do so I'll relay my findings to you and / or some Wikidedia committee or you could update policies.
- This is information I found easily that should have some bearing on a consensus:
- "The total number of English speakers in the world adds up to around 1,430,000,000." List_of_countries_by_English-speaking_population
- There are currently 46,926,663 Wikipedia accounts, of which 127,021 have made at least one edit during the last month. Wikipedia:Wikipedians
- The English Wikipedia includes 6,781,913 articles and it averages 540 new articles per day. In 2023, 812,635 registered editors made at least one edit.Wikipedia:Statistics
- Nearly 4,900,000,000 people visited Wikipedia in February 2022. 22 Astonishing Wikipedia Statistics and Facts
- English Wikipedia has 868 administrators Wikipedia:Administrators
- There have been 7 Wikipedians who commented on "stint".
- ProofCreature (talk) 22:14, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- I don't have any special "requirements"; I just stay open to what I am hearing in a discussion, the strength of the argumentation, and the ability to link that argumentation to the policies and guidelines of the encyclopedia. I'm afraid I cannot reduce it to a tidy little equation of this many statistics plus that many facts minus them there oppositions and expostulations divided by !votes. It's just something that comes with experience here. Mathglot (talk) 21:37, 10
- The survey response quantity that is required for statistically validity can be calculated simply from this website and the information above here.
- These websites have more complicated equations: https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/ppc/section3/ppc333.htm , Sample_size_determination ,https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050915015781 , Consensus-based_assessment
- A quick evaluation suggests that at the very minimum, to get a consensus with a 10% error possibility Wikipedia should get responses from 86 Administrators.