Talk:Statistics

For goodness sake this article is far, far too complex - this is supposed to be 'SIMPLE ENGLISH'! The reader can access the main Wikipedia if more complex information is needed. This page has unnecessary stuff - for example mean, mode, and fancy equations - NOT NEEDED. Keep is simple! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.225.70.180 (talk • contribs) 09:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

It's fairly acceptable now, considering the subject-matter. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:12, 9 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

• Change wording to remove "we".
• Looking for references.
• Add a few things about the history.
• Using of computers.

As a start. --Barras (talk) 10:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

The height examples in the Mode section are wrong (twice the same number)

Here are just ideas, feel free to implement:

• The water pollution in a lake should be measured ("That factory" is polluting too much); Two studies are done, both have different results (It matters where you take the water for analysis from)
• Light-bulb: If I build ligh-tbulbs, how big is the chance of "randomly" getting a bad one?
• Show that certain distributions cannot be used in some cases (Prime example:Normal distribution, very few samples)
• Get a ref for that drug testing being done with two groups, one getting placebo.

--Eptalon (talk) 22:07, 28 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

"The Americans did a census around 3500BC"

I'm no anthropologist, but I've never heard of an American census this old. Perhaps the Aztec in 1450 would be more believable. Where's the evidence for this? And "Americans" is in blue, the link taking you to an article on the USA! WTF?

I've undone the edit replacing "babylonians" by "americans", which was obviously wrong. Thank you, Savh·^{Tell me} 19:10, 29 July 2012 (UTC)Reply