Jump to content

Talk:FDR (disambiguation): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
could anybody please address the point? I really want to know
reword
Line 28: Line 28:
*'''Oppose'''. The redirect has been stable for quite some time and nothing in the above discussion indicates the president is not the primary topic for FDR. '''<span style="border: 1px #8C001A solid;background:#8C001A">[[User:Calidum|<span style="color: #FFFDD0;">Calidum</span>]]</span>''' 22:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
*'''Oppose'''. The redirect has been stable for quite some time and nothing in the above discussion indicates the president is not the primary topic for FDR. '''<span style="border: 1px #8C001A solid;background:#8C001A">[[User:Calidum|<span style="color: #FFFDD0;">Calidum</span>]]</span>''' 22:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' – the American president is [[wp:ptopic|primary topic]] for the base name FDR. A hatnote can suffice to redirect to the scientific term. <b style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC">[[User:CookieMonster755|<span style="color:blue">CookieMonster755</span>]][[User talk:CookieMonster755|<span style="color:green">✉</span>]]</b> 06:36, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
*'''Oppose''' – the American president is [[wp:ptopic|primary topic]] for the base name FDR. A hatnote can suffice to redirect to the scientific term. <b style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC">[[User:CookieMonster755|<span style="color:blue">CookieMonster755</span>]][[User talk:CookieMonster755|<span style="color:green">✉</span>]]</b> 06:36, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - Thanks everybody for participating in this, even if we disagree :)
*'''Thanks and question''' - Thanks everybody for participating in this, even if we disagree :)
:Could any one the people voting oppose please address the point that no ''unbiased'' and ''sufficient'' evidence has been given to support the ''very strong'' claim that <math>P(Roosevelt \mid FDR) >> P(not Roosevelt \mid FDR)</math> ? [[Sagan standard|Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence]]. Thanks! [[User:DrVogel|Dr. Vogel]] ([[User talk:DrVogel|talk]]) 08:38, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
:Could any one the people voting oppose please address the point that no ''unbiased'' and ''sufficient'' evidence has been given to support the ''very strong'' claim that <math>P(Roosevelt \mid FDR) >> P(not Roosevelt \mid FDR)</math> ? [[Sagan standard|Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence]]. Thanks! [[User:DrVogel|Dr. Vogel]] ([[User talk:DrVogel|talk]]) 08:38, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:40, 1 July 2019

WikiProject iconDisambiguation
WikiProject iconThis disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.

Requested move 29 June 2019

FDR (disambiguation)FDR – I'd like to see if there would be consensus in the community for moving this disambiguation page to the base name FDR, which at the moment is just a redirect to Franklin D. Roosevelt. I feel that there are other uses that are no less important than Roosevelt's initials. Whereas Roosevelt was no doubt a very important American president from a hundred years ago, False discovery rate (FDR) is a key concept in modern science. And FDR is also an acronym for several other important things - just go through the list in the disambiguation page and you'll see. This is why I believe the disambiguation page should be at FDR. I was wondering what you guys think and if there'd be consensus to make this move. Thanks, Dr. Vogel (talk) 20:30, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely. Definitely many results about Mr. Roosevelt. But a quick search on Web of Science gives 38,269 papers about false discovery rate. And these are scientific, peer-reviewed papers, published in scientific journals. Dr. Vogel (talk) 21:19, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

* Support per False Discovery Rate. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 21:58, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But how much of that traffic arrives via the redirect? Dr. Vogel (talk) 23:29, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Despite my cleverness, per Google Ngram I must oppose this nomination. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 00:09, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: the question is not whether Roosevelt is a more popular topic than all the other meanings of FDR combined (which is probably true) but whether nearly 100% of people who type FDR are looking for Roosevelt. Obviously more people know about and search about Roosevelt than about false discovery rate, simply because there are more people who have heard of world events than people who know science.
To put this in terms of conditional probability, the question is not whether:
but whether:
,
which would be a very strong claim, and according to the Sagan standard, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
If there isn't sufficient evidence to support that claim,
there isn't sufficient evidence to keep the disambiguation page not at FDR. Dr. Vogel (talk) 00:45, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's because those articles have titles that begin with FDR. Dr. Vogel (talk) 13:41, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That those titles only have to say "FDR" and be understood as to what they're referring is the point that is made. Dhtwiki (talk) 15:04, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is true, but it doesn't constitute sufficient unbiased evidence to support the very strong claim that
Could any one the people voting oppose please address the point that no unbiased and sufficient evidence has been given to support the very strong claim that  ? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Thanks! Dr. Vogel (talk) 08:38, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]