Talk:Statistics

Former good articleStatistics was one of the Mathematics good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 11, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted


Please click here to add new comments at the bottom of this page.


Remove "Mathematics applied to mathematics or the arts" section

[edit]

I edited this page to remove that section a while ago, but it was quickly reverted. It barely has any sources, and though it contains interesting information, I don't think any of its information belongs in an article covering the entire field of statistics. Any information that we decide does belong in the article should go to the "Statistics in academia" section. Kzyx (talk) 19:03, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Today I ended up agreeing with you, and re-deleting the section that you deleted. Cheers, Mgnbar (talk) 13:58, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Data science#Relationship to statistics not present

[edit]

Should the link be updated or removed? Fredrik-hammar (talk) 14:12, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find the link that you're talking about, either at Statistics or at Data science. If you're talking about editing the Data science article, then that would be best done at Talk:Data science. Sorry if I've misunderstood you. Mgnbar (talk) 12:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, should have been more clear but was writing from mobile. The link is under Statistics#Specialized disciplines.
This part of the source:
* Data science (see also: Data science#Relationship to statistics)
There is no Relationship to statistics section in Data science. Fredrik-hammar (talk) 12:52, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. It's gone now. Thanks. Mgnbar (talk) 14:02, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bayesian statistics non-sequitur

[edit]

Hi I'm a Wikipedia noob, but I noticed the Bayesian statistics section has an example that reads a bit out of place to me:

"For statistically modelling purposes, Bayesian models tend to be hierarchical, for example, one could model each YouTube channel as having video views distributed as a normal distribution with channel dependent mean and variance N(0, 1), while modeling the channel means as themselves coming from a normal distribution representing the distribution of average video view counts per channel, and the variances as coming from another distribution."

Typos aside ("statistically modeling", putting N(0, 1) after the word "variance" instead of "normal distribution"), this doesn't seem to be the most informative or recognizable example out there (there's a fresh hyperlink to YouTube). At the very least, it seems like it should have a textbook citation somewhere but I can't track one down—in contrast to the classic eight schools example that you'll find everywhere in online workbook and textbooks.

As it stands, it seems like the example is a non-sequitur, and not a very informative one because it should probably be something like: video views distributed as N(μ, σ2) with μ distributed as N(0, 1) and σ2 distributed as N(0, 1).

~2025-34141-64 (talk) 22:45, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]