User talk:ProofCreature

Hi, You recently reverted my edit on After the Gold Rush, with the album ratings template. However, the template is now known as music rating Majash2020 (talk) 15:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Where did you learn about the template's name change, @Majash2020? ProofCreature (talk) 15:30, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

If you search the template on Wikipedia, it will redirect you to Music ratings. Search "Template:Music ratings". I believe it's a recent change Majash2020 (talk) 17:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure what your intention was with this edit, but you stripped the short description template, image, and entire article lede from the article.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, that was entirely a mistake. ProofCreature (talk) 23:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

...conversation continued from here...

I'm curious about your requirements for consensus, statistically, factually. What is an appropriate proportion that validates a consensus? How many and from what common pool is it taken (i.e. what common denominator)?

ProofCreature (talk) 21:05, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't have any special "requirements"; I just stay open to what I am hearing in a discussion, the strength of the argumentation, and the ability to link that argumentation to the policies and guidelines of the encyclopedia. I'm afraid I cannot reduce it to a tidy little equation of this many statistics plus that many facts minus them there oppositions and expostulations divided by !votes. It's just something that comes with experience here. Mathglot (talk) 21:37, 10

I get it. It explains some comments. It is certainly easier and is not uncommon.

An echo chamber isn't a consensus. It can be difficult to recognize.

Maybe next week I'll research accepted statistics to determine consensus. If I do so I'll relay my findings to you and / or some Wikidedia committee or you could update policies.

This is information I found easily that should have some bearing on a consensus:

• "The total number of English speakers in the world adds up to around 1,430,000,000." List_of_countries_by_English-speaking_population
• There are currently 46,926,663 Wikipedia accounts, of which 127,021 have made at least one edit during the last month. Wikipedia:Wikipedians
• The English Wikipedia includes 6,781,913 articles and it averages 540 new articles per day. In 2023, 812,635 registered editors made at least one edit.Wikipedia:Statistics
• Nearly 4,900,000,000 people visited Wikipedia in February 2022. 22 Astonishing Wikipedia Statistics and Facts
• English Wikipedia has 868 administrators Wikipedia:Administrators
• There have been 7 Wikipedians who commented on "stint".

ProofCreature (talk) 22:14, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

• The survey response quantity that is required for statistically validity can be calculated simply from this website and the information above here.
• These websites have more complicated equations: https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/ppc/section3/ppc333.htm , Sample_size_determination ,https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050915015781 , Consensus-based_assessment

A quick evaluation suggests that at the very minimum, to get a consensus with a 10% error possibility Wikipedia should get responses from 86 Administrators.

ProofCreature (talk) 23:57, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I'm Doniago. I just wanted to let you know that your recent edit(s) to the page Star Trek: Deep Space Nine have been reverted because they appear to have added incorrect information. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite a reliable source, discuss it on the article's talk page, or leave me a message on my talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 19:15, 26 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Doniago From the dates that the different series premiered (indicated on their respective wikipedia pages) it looks to me that DS9 is the third series not the fourth. It premiered after TNG and before Voyager. What am I missing? ProofCreature (talk) 19:56, 26 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Star Trek: The Animated Series, perhaps? DonIago (talk) 20:07, 26 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

That is probably it, @Doniago. Maybe it should be included it the info box's related section (way at the bottom) with the other three shows. ProofCreature (talk) 12:13, 27 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

There's already a link to Star Trek#Television. I imagine TAS isn't specifically linked because, unlike TNG and VOY, it isn't contemporaneous with DS9. Similarly, DISCO and the newer series aren't linked. DonIago (talk) 17:10, 27 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi, ProofCreature! Your proposition A is true (we philosophers call it "the world", but let's call it the universe), your proposition B is true. Proposition C is vague: we create some of the laws, some we don't create, some we follow, some we don't follow. All this is pretty obvious. Logic has been contested (e.g., by Willard van Orman Quine). That's why it interests me. Regards. ReaderOfSci-FiNovelsAndPhilosophy (talk) 12:21, 9 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hello, thank’s for commenting my user space and my talk page.

I like being mysterious, but you can discuss with me when you want. Macron le macaron (talk) 08:39, 29 April 2026 (UTC)Reply