7
$\begingroup$

If you feel a question should be closed please provide the link to the question as an answer along with a brief rationale. Also ensure that you link to this meta thread as a comment on the main question so that the poster get a chance to defend the question.

We have moderators now, so please use flags instead of posting answers to this question.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ +1 For a great idea! $\endgroup$ – user88 Jul 29 '10 at 15:58
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ To try and maintain a bit of structure, I think that questions currently being discussed should have a single up vote and questions that are now closed show be down voted to zero. Do people agree? $\endgroup$ – csgillespie Jul 30 '10 at 10:27
  • $\begingroup$ @csgillespie Great idea! $\endgroup$ – Peter Smit Jul 30 '10 at 10:37
  • $\begingroup$ Note that when you want to change your vote, you sometimes have a lock because the question isn't edited. Edit the question (add Now Closed e.g.) and you can change your vote to a downvote. I think answer that have "now closed" can even go below zero votes to have new answers also float up immediately. $\endgroup$ – Peter Smit Jul 30 '10 at 10:40
  • $\begingroup$ @Peter: I agree. Set closed questions to -1. $\endgroup$ – csgillespie Jul 30 '10 at 10:48
  • $\begingroup$ We should perhaps follow the following protocol: Keep closed questions at -1. Keep questions we decide to keep open at 0. Currently debated questions at 1. If people agree with this and see a question whose votes do not align with the above please vote up/down to adjust as needed. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 4 '10 at 10:00
  • $\begingroup$ @Srikant: The problem with keeping open questions at 0, is that new proposed questions could easily get lost - since you can't up vote your own question. $\endgroup$ – csgillespie Aug 4 '10 at 10:05
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah that is an issue. Perhaps, then set 'keep open questions' to -1 and closed at '-2'. That way, the open questions will remain separated from the closed ones. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 4 '10 at 10:17
  • $\begingroup$ @Srikant: I'm not convinced that having 1, 0, -1, -2 classes is just adding a bit too much structure where it's not needed. However, I'm happy to go with what others think. $\endgroup$ – csgillespie Aug 4 '10 at 14:55
  • $\begingroup$ @csgillespie I am fine with what we have. Just thought that adding a bit more structure may help. Consider my suggestion withdrawn- not a big deal. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 4 '10 at 15:09
0
$\begingroup$

Now Closed

The two questions:

  1. MI in regulatory networks
  2. How to apply DPI to MI data?

both refer to MI. I asked for clarification, but was ignored, and got another question.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Now closed

Question linear regression is unclear, and the author does not seem to do anything to improve it.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Voted to close. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 3 '10 at 0:41
0
$\begingroup$

Now closed

Consider What code would you put.

I think it is off topic; it is a pool about personal preferences on using R, what's more it is not related to statistics.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think this is a policy we may want to revisit from time to time. If the R community 'migrates' to our site over time because of various reasons (e.g., time constraints force them to choose only one site to be on etc) then we may have to allow questions of this type here. Voted to close for now. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 3 '10 at 8:56
  • $\begingroup$ Following meta.stats.stackexchange.com/questions/1/… we have to vote to close (unless we change our policy). As Srikant said we should probably revisit this issue from time to time. $\endgroup$ – csgillespie Aug 3 '10 at 10:32
0
$\begingroup$

See the question How to write p-value.

I think it is offtopic.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Although the question is not asking a specific statistical question, the answers are very useful. So overall I don't mind it. $\endgroup$ – csgillespie Jul 29 '10 at 21:23
  • $\begingroup$ I think that is a legitimate question. I have people asking me that frequently. $\endgroup$ – Rob Hyndman Jul 29 '10 at 23:46
  • $\begingroup$ Also, I am not sure where else someone can ask this question. In addition, the question's focus was very clear. So, I would be inclined not to close. $\endgroup$ – svadali Jul 29 '10 at 23:57
  • $\begingroup$ Check on Google? Read randomly selected article from the paper she/he is submitting to? Even the answers suggest that if it is not off-topic then subjective. $\endgroup$ – user88 Jul 30 '10 at 0:34
  • $\begingroup$ ok, perhaps it should be CW? $\endgroup$ – svadali Jul 30 '10 at 1:22
  • $\begingroup$ Right, I think there is a consensus that it should be left. $\endgroup$ – user88 Jul 31 '10 at 12:59
  • $\begingroup$ Agreed. Move to -1 votes. BTW can we force a question to be a CW? $\endgroup$ – csgillespie Aug 2 '10 at 21:41
  • $\begingroup$ @csgillespie Easy to say; I can't vote on my own and no one is eager to do it. And no, only moderators and 2k+ users can do that. $\endgroup$ – user88 Aug 2 '10 at 23:37
  • $\begingroup$ Downvoted to start moving this to -1. We have to wait for a moderator or for someone to reach 2k to make this CW. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 3 '10 at 0:37
0
$\begingroup$

Question about how to remove zeros. How should you handle cell values equal to zero in a contingency table?

It is a duplicate of a question by Rob Hyndman.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Vote for close (or merge ?)

I just installed the latest version of R. What packages should I obtain? should be closed (or merged) as it is a duplicate of What R packages do you find most useful in your daily work?. Some upvoted comments in favor of closing have been dropped in the former question, but I couldn't find a conclusive statement.

$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

Now closed

It is impossible to say what normalization of series question is about.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Actually, this question is a bit better than the some of the others posted by the OP. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 3 '10 at 0:40
  • $\begingroup$ @Srikant One can guess that it is normalization to (0,1), I admit, but still it can be about outlier detection as well. All this closing is to punish dubious behavior. $\endgroup$ – user88 Aug 3 '10 at 7:35
  • $\begingroup$ I agree but we should also give the OP some time. Perhaps, he/she will edit the question especially as this question is a bit better. If there is no change in the question status in another 24 hours we should close it. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 3 '10 at 9:00
-1
$\begingroup$

Question closed

See the question Power of Holm’s multiple comparison testing compared to others.

There are no answers and the question asker has not responded to a request for clarification.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I would be inclined to keep this question open. The question is fairly specific and lack of an answer should not be a reason to close. Perhaps, someone may come along in the future who can answer the question. The lack of a response from the OP is a bit of a concern but not enough for me to close the question. My 2 cents. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 4 '10 at 1:07
  • $\begingroup$ I vote to close. Questions that aren't clear, should be closed to keep the site tidy. $\endgroup$ – csgillespie Aug 4 '10 at 8:57
  • $\begingroup$ I vote for keeping it open. I really don't see a problem there - the question is asked as well as many questions here are, and the lack of answers is likely because it's a highly specific, fairly technical question. $\endgroup$ – Matt Parker Aug 4 '10 at 13:04
  • $\begingroup$ I vote to close. Robin made a good point that the question in current form does not contain all information necessary to answer it. $\endgroup$ – user88 Aug 4 '10 at 14:10
  • $\begingroup$ Well - actually it only lacked an answer because I was waiting for the OP to clarify; I had worked out an answer and was waiting to make sure that the question asker and I were on the same page. If the question asker doesn't care enough to respond to requests for clarification, and we aren't going to close the question, I'll go ahead and give my stab at answering it. $\endgroup$ – russellpierce Aug 4 '10 at 14:36
  • $\begingroup$ I have changed my mind as I see that the OP has logged in after Robin's comment and has not provided clarification one way or another. Voting to close. Now that we have moderators, presumably, the question can be re-opened if the OP clarifies at a later point in time. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 4 '10 at 23:22
-1
$\begingroup$

Community wiki

What do others think about Essential reads for people interested in Actuary and Actuarial science? An edge case or off-topic? I'm inclined to think it should be allowed, but thought it was worth asking.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Do we want to allow career related questions for stats? If yes, then the above is perhaps on topic. $\endgroup$ – svadali Aug 5 '10 at 12:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Edge case, so allow. $\endgroup$ – csgillespie Aug 5 '10 at 12:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Still I've converted it to CW since it doesn't have a definite answer. $\endgroup$ – user88 Aug 5 '10 at 14:50