Wikipedia talk:CONSONANTS

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconEssays Low‑impact
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.
LowThis page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.
Note icon
The above rating was automatically assessed using data on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.

What an awesome essay this is. --Doncram (talk) 02:56, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...awesomely bizarre :D ——SerialNumber54129 16:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Real thing" is not a criteria in regard to deletion, though. We should be asking whether a high proportion of consonants is correlated with WP:V and WP:N. Based on this essay at this point in time, I'd say the sample size is too small. Jack N. Stock (talk) 06:44, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The sample size might be small, but it's big enough to do a calculation;

Correlation of consonant density to existence
Data Consonant density Existence C Deviation C Variance E Deviation E Variance Covariance Correlation
n c e dev(c) = (cc) var(c) = (cc)2 dev(e) = (ee) var(e) = (ee)2 cov(c,e) = dev(c)·dev(e) cor(C, E) = cov(C, E) / (σCσE)
Rhynchobombyx 0.86 1 −0.01 0.00 0.33 0.11 0.00
Schtschurowskia 0.73 1 −0.13 0.02 0.33 0.11 −0.04
dfgdgdsg 1.00 0 0.14 0.02 −0.67 0.44 −0.09
TOTAL 3 2.59 2 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.67 −0.14
MEAN 0.86 0.67 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.22 −0.05 −0.89
Standard dev σ()=√var() 0.11 0.47

This shows a correlation coefficient of −0.89. That is, a very strong anti-correlation. That is, exactly the opposite of the claimed effect – probability of existence goes down as the consonant density goes up. I suspect a bigger problem than the size of the sample is that it was not chosen at random. SpinningSpark 16:41, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • You seem to be suggesting that better test of this hypothesis would involve random combinations of letters, and a calculation of whether random combinations with higher consonant density are more likely to produce words. All we need is a random letter-combination generator. Jack N. Stock (talk) 00:56, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, I'm suggesting the whole idea is a heap of dingo poo. SpinningSpark 16:41, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

zzz[edit]

Zzyzx (incredibly, a disambiguation page, as is Zzz and Xyzzy), Zzyzzyxx, and ZZZZZ all exist! SpinningSpark 16:41, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]