This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics articles
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
[[Critical value#Statistics|critical value]] The anchor (#Statistics)
has been deleted.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors
Propose move to a different name
I would like to propose that this article be renamed as Student-Newman-Keuls, which is the more common and accurate name. Plus, it would be consistent with the
post-hoc analysis article.
danielkueh (
talk) 22:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)reply
At present the article has two references cleary using the name "Newman-Keuls" and none using "Student-Newman-Keuls". Let's improve the article first, at least to the extent of better contextualised citations.
Melcombe (
talk) 00:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)reply
I agree the article needs improvement. But before more work goes into adding information, I believe this (the title) needs to be resolved first. Here are a few references:
Zar, Biostatistical Analysis
Rumsey, Statistics II for Dummies
Anderson, Empirical Direction in Design and Analysis
There are more of course, especially in peer-reviewed journals. Historically, Newman also gave credit to Student for the idea for the idea of the range test (a major characteristic of the method). Thus, if we were to include a history section, it would also include this tid bit of info, which would be consistent with the literature and the name, Student-Newman-Keuls (SNK).
danielkueh (
talk) 00:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Looking around it seems that there are already redirect from Student-Newman-Keuls method/test to here (with various short and long dashes), so there is a question of choosing test or method for the final bit of the title. I also see that
SNK (disambiguation) already redirects here. It looks also as if both versions of the name would need to be mentioned in the article. I will add a note to the stats project talk page tp attempt to draw further discussants.
Melcombe (
talk) 09:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)reply
I agree that at a minimum, both names should be included in the text regardless of whether we decide to rename this article or not. Thanks for looking into this.
danielkueh (
talk) 16:51, 12 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Comment: The addition of the history section and assumptions sections are definitely improvements. I won't quibble over whether E should be a subscript, as that is just a convention. The
Advantages subsection is quite redundant. it just restates what has already been discussed in the lead and procedure sections. In the the disadvantage subsection however, points 1 and 2 need some explaining. References should also be included. Point 3 is redundant. But all in all, thank you (and your students) for the contribution. Cheers.
danielkueh (
talk) 17:38, 20 October 2014 (UTC)reply
Thank you for the feedback Danielkueh. I can not promise the students will continue to fix this work, but it does seem progress has been made.
As for MSE, since this convention is also used in the wiki-article, I think it makes sense.
I have just modified one external link on
Newman–Keuls method. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.