I've only just really noticed the tag.

It has no tag wiki and appears to be being used for both the t-test and the t-distribution (with, at a quick glance, more using it to refer to the test). It is used in fewer posts to refer to the test than and in fewer posts that refer to the distribution than . I don't see a clear purpose to it outside those meanings. About 2/3 of its uses have been this year (7 and a bit months); for some reason it seems suddenly popular.

My suggestion: I think (i) any references to Student's t-distribution under [students-t] should be changed to [t-distribution]; and then (ii) [students-t] should become a synonym of [t-test].

Given that it involves more than a handful of changes and its total number of uses is about the same as for [t-test], I thought I should ask for views on this before doing anything hasty. What do you think?

(I haven't yet checked if I have enough answers in the right tags to do all these steps myself)


1 Answer 1


(+1, I thought I had asked about this on meta a while ago, but evidently I didn't.)

I agree, I see no reason for the existence of the [students-t] tag. (I just edited its excerpt to note this.) I think starting to re-tag those instances where it is used to refer to the distribution is a good idea / first step. Since there are several such cases, my recommendation would be to do 2-3 at a time, several hours apart so as not to flood the main page. I did the same thing a few weeks ago w/ the ambiguous [fisher] tag. (You may even want to re-tag those instances where it refers to the test, but you could do that second--or not at all.) These re-taggings should really be done before the tag is made a synonym for [t-test], or those threads will become mis-tagged and the situation will be much more difficult to rectify.

  • $\begingroup$ +1 I agree that the retagging needs to happen first. $\endgroup$
    – Glen_b
    Commented Aug 11, 2013 at 23:43

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .