Talk:Cumulative density function: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 05:28, 6 May 2025

Latest revision as of 22:01, 22 May 2025

(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)

Line 93:

<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 22:01, 27 May 2025 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1748383270}}

{{rfc|sci|rfcid=E371899}}

Should the page [[cumulative density function]] be:

* Option '''A''': a redirect to [[cumulative distribution function]]

Line 115 ⟶ 114:

* Option '''A''': Someone looking for a "cumulative density function" is clearly looking for something cumulative, or they wouldn't have included an extra word to express that. No hatnote seems necessary to me; it seems like just a misnomer but not really unclear. (It also doesn't seem common, so not worth the clutter.) —⁠ ⁠[[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 17:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

* David Eppstein wrote: "If there are only two topics to disambiguate and one of them is primary" etc. I don't think that rule was intended for cases where the title of the article is a complete misnomer and oxymoron, like "cumulative density function." [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 05:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

** '''Comment''' it is not clear to me that it is a complete misnomer and oxymoron. I agree that it's a poorer choice of terminology than "cumulative distribution function", but as I said above, I do not agree with calling it an error in Wikivoice, unless reliable secondary sources specifically making that exact claim can be found. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 05:41, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

===Discussion===