I agree with the article as a whole. I just personally believe that the median is generally worse to use than the mean, so I believe that if you're going to rec

I agree with the article as a whole. I just personally believe that the median is generally worse to use than the mean, so I believe that if you're going to recommend the median over the mean, you should provide guidelines on when to do so. I know not everyone agrees with me on this (as evidenced by some responses in these comments) but that's the perspective I'm coming from. > it might be true that "mean" is appropriate in just as many contexts as "median", but at least in my opinion, people cite a "mean" when a "median" would have been appropriate more frequently than the reverse. Sure, but this is only true because the mean is used so much more. If the whole world was instead taught in grade school to use nothing but the median, there would be just as many (I'd argue more) misuses as there are now, except this time the median would be the offender. People using the median are more likely to be using it inappropriately because it's the nonstandard option, but that's only because they're not using it blindly. If people starting using the median just because, it would suffer the same issue.