Talk:Homogeneity and heterogeneity (statistics)

message: I have tagged this article as confusing for a number of reasons:
*"coefficient of homogeneity" mentioned but no precise definition is in evidence.
*"..depart from this ideal lattice form.." - not clear what is meant by 'ideal lattice form'
*Fig. 1 - what on earth does this represent? what are the scales on the axes? etc.
I have many other concerns. Madmath789 13:15, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have absolutely no hatred, and I am not interested in censorship. If you can give any mathematical justification for the the correctness and usefulness of the diagrams I removed, please feel free to do so - I will be more than happy happy to see any additions which make this article a positive contribution to the encyclopedia! Madmath789 23:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusing tag

message: The usefulness of figures you deleted is obvious to anyone who can mentally expand a series. For instance, to fully describe the Figure 1 would necessitate a table with 32 rows. Anyone who is not mathematically challenged can expand a pattern in the table adjacent to Figure 1 from 8 by 3 to 32 by 5 matrix. However, after you deleted the relevant figures, I attached a link to an article which fully describes the discussed patterns and a link to an article describing the relevant truth tables. However, your "knee jerk" action was to immediately obliterate this second link that, in many ways, may be helpful to people with only a cursory knowledge of Boolean algebra to fully follow the subsequent discussion. What propelled you to do that I find hard to judge, as it does not even enter my mind to censor and to destroy someone's bona fide work. David Cruise —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LCF (talk • contribs) .
:The figures lack the captions to describe what they represent. What are the x, y and z axis? How do these relate to the truth table, which has three variables p,q,r, or the text which describes five variables? Whats the non-standard notation (p 1 q), should that be (p | q)? --Salix alba (talk) 09:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also beleive before we allow these diagrams back, that we need to see some sources which show that these things are in common usage in statistics. So far, the only sources I can find for them are all connected with David Cruise, D. Krus, Cruise Scientific, or Visualstatistics.net - without some independent sources, they must surely fall under the banner of original research? Madmath789 10:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: You're possibly using notation and terminology which is common among psychometricians, but is considerably different from that used by logicians or statisticians.  (Yes, I am implying that psychometricians are not statisticians.  Make of it what you will.)  You need to define and source the notation in an appropriate article (psychometrics)?) before you use the notation elsewhere. — Arthur Rubin |  (talk) 18:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen omen

message: The other day we talked about more interesting issues than what to do with this entry. Contrary to Madmath's opinion, I do not intend to wait for his permission to put back pictures he deleted, as a matter of fact I do not intend to put any more work to this article, as I learned the hard way that on Wikipedia, hours of work can be wiped out in seconds. However, Madmath's destructive editing distorted this article beyond belief that now indeed, as he claims, it does not make sense. I intend to convert the article into a stub which Madmath is invited to elaborate into an acceptable article. If this strange character instead of constructive editing will again resort to distructive edits and reverts, I intend to keep my options open. LCF 19:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What to do

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Homogeneity (statistics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060624164532/http://www.visualstatistics.net/Scaling/Homogeneity/Homogeneity.htm to http://www.visualstatistics.net/Scaling/Homogeneity/Homogeneity.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified