4 ms·
The title of the article is a bit vague. "Nearly all" means 77%, which would potentially be a more accurate title for this submission. To use a common Wikipedia
by zbentley 9y ago
The title of the article is a bit vague. "Nearly all" means 77%, which would potentially be a more accurate title for this submission. To use a common Wikipedia standard, "nearly all" seems like an example of a weasel word (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weasel_word) or otherwise vague detensifier.
Not sure what the guidelines regarding deviation from linked article headlines are, though.
- vorg 9y agoEven worse than weasel words is false logic, such as these two statements: > a recent study that looked at the 250 million edits made on Wikipedia during its first ten years > At the time of writing, there are roughly 132,000 registered editors who have been active on Wikipedia in the last month being used to conclude that: > So statistically speaking, only about 1,300 people are creating over three-quarters of the 600 new articles posted to Wikipedia every day This assumes the number of daily new articles being posted in 2017 is the same as the average number of edits of both new and existing articles being made from 2001 to 2011 (averaged over all 10 years), which is a ridiculous assumption.
- zbentley 9y agoThat does seem very suspect. Is historical data on submission rates easily available?