== Re: Correlation and dependence article ==

Hi again, and well done for registering. 

Regarding the link that you were/are wanting to add to the Correlation and dependence article, I suggest the following... (i) you could best make your points for inclusion on the article's talk/discussion page, so that others can comment ... the edit summary and user's talk pages are not good for this; (ii) you could try to find a place in the article to make some kind of helpful reference to this link's content (that is, an inline citation rather than it just appearing in a bald way under "External links"), so that readers would know that the link is meant to be useful regarding "interpretation"; (iii) if you feel that this link does have something particularly useful to say, or a good way of looking at things, then you could try to summarise/ re-state these points within the article itself  ...again you could ask for opinions/help on the article's talk page, but there is really no reason why you shouldn't go ahead and add something. My own opinion is that adding plain "external links" should be avoided once an article has substantial content. A previous editor mentioned "linkspam" and, while this link might not quite fit within that term, the website itself didn't seem to have a lot of other content (but I could be wrong) and the "substantiality" of the source has some bearing on whether a link is appropriate.

If you have an inclination to help in improving the content of the statistics articles more generally you should see Wikipedia:WikiProject Statistics. There is certainly need for help in improving the "understandability" of all of the statistics articles, so don't be put off if there seems to be an emphasis on mathematical technicalities.