User talk:Marskell/Using statistics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• In my opinion, all that needs to be said is that data in peer-reviewed publication is preferred to unpublished or original research. This is said already in many places. The examples are gravy (and like gravy, inconsistent and over-flavorful -- I do like the last example about N. Korea, though) Dystopos 03:56, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Given that we spent four days arguing the inclusion of a statistical caveat on New Orleans clearly more does need to be said. It would have been nice if in the middle of that discussion I could've pointed Ashley Y to a guideline that specifically states what statistics are to be used in infoxes; unfortunately this doesn't exist (as near as I can tell).

The examples were written up quickly and placed as a user page for that reason so, you know, you could save the condescension. Marskell 10:10, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

I didn't mean to be condescending. I guess it was a little late to try at being clever, though. Sorry. As to the point at hand, Ashley Y seemed to feel obligated to ignore several guidelines that do exist, including the ones expounded on here. Having another guideline wouldn't have eased that process unless it specifically said "Infoboxes are not to have notes about caveats". In my opinion the existing guidelines are a sufficient buttress against unverifiable nonsense. Perhaps it would be better to argue for a narrower definition of this particular infobox at Wikiproject:Cities Dystopos 02:25, 19 September 2005 (UTC)