User talk:4.240.183.7
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
User:4.240.183.7 may also be User:4.240.183.104.
[edit] Welcome!
Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia! You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but you may wish to create an account. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits, including:
- The use of a username of your choice, provided that it is appropriate.
- The use of your own watchlist, which shows when articles you are interested in have changed.
- The ability to create new pages.
- The ability to rename pages.
- The ability to edit semi-protected pages.
- The ability to upload images.
- The ability to customize the appearance and behavior of the website.
- Your IP address will no longer be visible to other users.
We hope that you choose to become a Wikipedian and create an account. Feel free to ask me any questions you may have on my talk page. By the way, make sure to sign and date your comments with four tildes (~~~~). — Chris53516 (Talk) 16:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Comments to self
People,
Your efforts at explaining a difficult subject would be much more appreciated by users of Wikipedia if you would stop making the top explanatory paragraph more difficult than it needs to be. This topic was originally entitled "correlation implies causation" because it was linked to the logical fallacy that is thankfully still a part of the text. There is absolutely no reason the title can't read "Correlation Does Not Imply Causation" and the top paragraph remain as written below. The point of the topic is to further explain the cum hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy, particularly as it pertains to science and statistics, which I think it currently does if you word it like this:
When a correlation implies causation, whether in the sciences or through statistics, it may be assumed there is a cause-and-effect relationship between two variables. However, according to logical reasoning a correlation should not immediately be considered a cause-and-effect relationship. When two events that occur together are prematurely considered to be a cause-and-effect relationship, and evidence only exists that the relationship is correlational, it is a logical fallacy to imply (especially in published research) one factor is immediately causing the other. This type of logical fallacy is known as cum hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin for "with this, therefore because of this") and false cause (see General pattern below).
PLEASE stop assuming most people will understand the language of logic when they come to Wikipedia for information. There is nothing wrong with using simple language.
People,
Your efforts at explaining a difficult subject would be much more appreciated by users of Wikipedia if you would stop making the top explanatory paragraph more difficult than it needs to be. This topic was originally entitled "correlation implies causation" because it was linked to the logical fallacy that is thankfully still a part of the text. There is absolutely no reason the title can't read "Correlation Does Not Imply Causation" and the top paragraph remain as written below. The point of the topic is to further explain the cum hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy, particularly as it pertains to science and statistics, which I think it currently does if you word it like this:
When a correlation implies causation, whether in the sciences or through statistics, it may be assumed there is a cause-and-effect relationship between two variables. However, according to logical reasoning a correlation should not immediately be considered a cause-and-effect relationship. When two events that occur together are prematurely considered to be a cause-and-effect relationship, and evidence only exists that the relationship is correlational, it is a logical fallacy to imply (especially in published research) one factor is immediately causing the other. This type of logical fallacy is known as cum hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin for "with this, therefore because of this") and false cause (see General pattern below).
PLEASE do not assuming most people will understand the language of logic when they come to Wikipedia for information. There is nothing wrong with using simple language to explain difficult concepts.
[edit] Warnings
Thank you for experimenting with the page Correlation does not imply causation on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. — Chris53516 (Talk) 16:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 | This is the discussion page for an anonymous user, identified by the user's numerical IP address. Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users. Registering also hides your IP address. [WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • Traceroute • Geolocate • Tor check • Rangeblock finder] · [RIRs: America · Europe · Africa · Asia-Pacific · Latin America/Caribbean] |
