Maybe join other statisticians
You are welcome to join us and add this user-box.
Best regards, 22:26, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Mmm, well, perhaps you could advise: I wanted to add something statistical to the stuff about measurement, a la David Hand. I cannot work out where to put it. His view was of course that statisticians have neglected measurement for too long but I think his book and JRSSA article are worth citing. Any ideas? Ca3tki (talk) 22:35, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- I think that User:Melcombe has the best knowledge of WP statistics articles, and could better advise you.
- Maybe you could mention measurement in relation to Wayne Fuller's book (or maybe another Iowa econometrician) or the SEM people, like Kenneth A. Bollen....
23:13, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- I guess I was thinking more about the theory of what it means to measure something statistically. I'm not sure that anyone else has attempted what David Hand has done. I'm just a bit wary of starting a whole new article on statistical approaches to measurement as it would be just one author to rely on. I'll have to think about it. Thanks anyway Ca3tki (talk) 23:38, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Ca3tki!
- Don't worry about writing text at first. If you can provide excellent references, particularly to on-line sources, then the reader is well served. I would suggest looking at a standard handbook, encyclopedia, or dictionary of statistics (econometrics, psychometrics) and finding an article or two about measurement. Just try to provide a handful of the best references, and then write what you can using Hand.
- My best article is Shapley–Folkman lemma, which has citations to excellent economic references (the Handbooks of Economics and the New Palgrave and draft textbooks by the leading researchers.)
- (Since you want to use one reference, at first, it can be a challenge to avoid close paraphrasing, including duplicating the structure of passages from Hand: Ask me for help if you have questions. You can also draft your article in your user space.)
- All articles begin with a first babble, and then grow in ways that their initial authors could not foresee. Just write with an aim towards the truth, and everything will be fine. :)
- Melcombe is much more systematic and encyclopedic than me. I write more about my own interests and THE TRUTH, and then try to edit myself towards a neutral point of view that honestly represents the main serious points of view on contentious issues. I think Melcombe starts more by reading a few encyclopedic sources one day and then writing a good article based on them the next; his way is probably better than mine. ;)
- Best regards,
- 11:18, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- P.S. 17:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Here's a good reference:
- Stefanski, L. A. (2000). "Measurement error models (Vignettes for the Year 2000: Theory and Methods, ed. by George Casella)". Journal of the American Statistical Association. 95 (452?): 1349–1353??. JSTOR 2669786??. MR 1825292?? Check
|mr=value (help). Unknown parameter
- Stefanski, L. A. (2002). "Measurement error models (Chapter 4: Theory and methods of statistics, ed. by George Casella)". In Raftery, Adrian E.; Tanner, Martin A.; Wells, Martin T. Statistics in the 21st century. Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability. 93. Chapman and Hall, and CRC. pp. 461–470. JSTOR 2669786??. MR 1825292?? Check
|mr=value (help). Unknown parameter
- Stefanski does cite Wayne Fuller's Measurement Error Models, besides his Measurement error in nonlinear models (with Carroll and Rupert). 17:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
You may enjoy writing about a Kiwi Cambridge statistician, Peter Whittle. His autobiography and on-line histories of the Cambridge Statistical Laboratory are often hilarious and always instructive, and so are worth reading just for fun. 11:21, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- Never heard of him. I will have to look up whathe has said about the stats lab, though. It wouldn't surprise me if I had read some before and forgotten about it.Ca3tki (talk) 11:30, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
Invitation to comment at Monty Hall problem RfC
You are invited to comment on the following probability-related RfC:
While the public understanding of probability is interestin, I wouldn't say I was interested in finite sets. Simply I would refer you to Polyà if you want to talk about problem solving. For me,this article is not important enough to spend time on. Ca3tki (talk) 07:01, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for helping to give the article the scope to justify removing the list. The historical examples I think can now be condensed, to provide a useful background to the practice. The 'modern' census now needs to be properly introduced, and summarised. There is much potential for other change. I invite you to be bold yourself :) -- zzuuzz (talk) 23:02, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Along the lines of being bold, I see you undid my edit to this article from a few years ago in which I mentioned the problem of enumeration in what in the U.S. is called "group quarters", stating that this gave a U.S. focus to the piece. I am afraid that by NOT mentioning the U.S. in this instance and instead using the term "communal residences", you may be making the article overstep its bounds. I do not know what other countries term such quarters/ residences, but I DO know what they are termed in the US, which is why I mentioned it. I also know that the term "communal residences" is NOT used in the US for any part of the US census. Giving a specific example of a term used in the US does not mean the article then has a US focus, it only means it has a US example, and taking out such an example and putting in a term that does not have meaning in any census doesn't help the article at all. I hope you see where I have been headed with this. I will not undo your edit, but I ask you to consider your tactic on this one. Thanks. KDS4444Talk 17:35, 3 February 2015 (UTC)