Talk:Exact statistics

Statistics Mid‑importance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Mathematics Mid‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics 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.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-priority on the project's priority scale.

Advertisement[edit]

I think the ads for the computersoftware should be removed

XPro is a free software package and so it is a good idea to have the link so that users can perform exact parametric methods at no cost.

I also agree that StatXact link may serve as an ad. Since it is a commercial software package the link is removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweeraha (talk • contribs) 14:29, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like we are in an edit war with User:Ionlycametosay who really wants to keep restoring those advertisements. I just undid the most recent additions, having previously removed them eight years ago. If Ionlycametosay really wants those ads, please give your arguments on this talk page. Cryptarch (talk) 23:15, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

Not sure why we need two articles so similar—G716 <^T·_C> 01:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The text of the two articles isn't that similar, though they both need work. The topics aren't synonymous—'exact statistics' is a broader topic than 'exact test' as the former includes exact confidence intervals. Exact tests are a more straightforward topic than exact confidence intervals and usually encountered first so there may be merit in separate articles. So perhaps we could have an article on 'exact tests', one on 'exact confidence intervals', and a shorter one on 'exact statistics' introducing both? --Qwfp (talk) 10:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The articles aren't similar, I'm with Qwfp on this one. 98.221.85.188 (talk) 14:47, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, they are two separate things. Removing the merge notice. ScienceApe (talk) 00:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Reference[edit]

It appears that there is an incorrect reference. Based on my checking of the Journal, the following reference does not exist (or is incorrectly referenced):

Mehta, C. R.& Patel, N. R. 1997. "Exact inference in categorical data". Biometrics, 53(1), 112-117.

It is possible the reference could be as follows:

Mehta, C.R. and N.R. Patel, 1998. Exact Inference for Categorical Data. In P. Armitage and T. Colton, eds., Encyclopedia of Biostatistics (Chichester: John Wiley), pp. 1411-1422.

Can anyone confirm? Mari370 (talk) 14:37, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was not able to verify the reference and so I took it out. Sweeraha (talk) 17:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]