13

To answer the title question: Yes, all such questions should be community wiki. Proposal I propose the creation of an exception rule for questions about book recommendations, similar to the one created for What is your favorite “data analysis” cartoon? and Famous statistician quotes. To ensure a certain quality, the exception rule can only be applied if ...


11

You don't necessarily need a community wiki unless you expect others to edit it; just a single canonical version of the question with a good answer would suffice. Surely there are some good candidates already present as answers. If none are sufficiently generic, one could be chosen and edited to be made more generic -- or if substantial changes would be ...


11

I don't agree that book recommendations are a good use for this site — but let's set that aside for a moment to avoid using Community Wiki as a way to make these somehow okay. Community Wiki was not designed to solicit crowd-sourced lists of stuff. The problem with Community Wiki is it's often used to to allow questions that otherwise would not be ...


11

I disagree with this suggestion. Having grown up on this policy, I don't have the same issues with it. Here are some (rambling) thoughts: There are a number of 'big-list' type questions on CV that are not really on topic here. Under the strict policy you suggest, they should be closed and then subsequently deleted. I gather this has happened on SO in ...


9

You (or possibly a moderator) seem to have checked the "community wiki" box when editing the question. The result being, that the post has become a community wiki post, which means there are no reputation gains for the OP. You can edit to remove the checkbox, but any upvotes that occurred during the period it was community wiki will not count towards your ...


9

[Posting an answer myself to enable people to vote.] By now Approximate $e$ using Monte Carlo Simulation became CW as well. I think that making such questions CW is an unfair, unreasonable, and harmful policy. This policy is unfair. If @Aksakal posted his (by now accepted) answer first, it could have been upvoted and accepted by the OP without many other ...


8

I don't think these threads need to be made community wiki. While the initial idea of CW was to lower the threshold for editing so that there could be a single group answer, it hasn't really been used that way on any site, as far as I'm aware. It's certainly never been used that way here. For what it's worth, I don't even think that's a good goal or ...


6

@whuber points out a mistaken assumption in my question: I had falsely assumed that community wiki applied to questions and answers together as one piece, not separately. I suppose, in the fashion of Zen, the acceptable answer to my question is mu: unask the question.


5

There's a third approach, which is at least worth presenting: such posts could be treated just like others—recommendations of a statistical method, say—, rather than like polls. A great answer might deal with several notable textbooks; discussing what they cover, & omit; their statistical prerequistes; their mathematical level; their ...


5

Community-wiki status (this is not a tag) is generally added by moderators, so the best way to indicate that your post should be converted to CW is to flag your question for moderator attention. There are some cases where a post will turn to CW automagically (see examples in the previous link). Answers can be made CW by the user directly (by checking the box ...


5

You don't need to defer to moderators' opinions on statistical issues. We abuse the CW feature to allow questions that don't meet our guidelines, but which nevertheless we like for some reason or other - in particular "big list" questions. This is an example. So the advice at Should I edit a factual error? applies.


4

Regular users cannot convert questions (whole threads in practice) to community wiki. That was once possible, but hasn't been for several years. You can convert your own answer to CW, but that won't make the question CW or the other answers. If you believe a thread should be CW, you have to flag the question and ask the moderators to do it. Just click on ...


1

I say go ahead, but would be cautious about what you put about this. Because this is not true for all advanced LSTM time series models. And whatever answer you put is probably not going to be true in the next 2-3 years. Unlike SARIMA, SARCH and GARCH assume a 1 step difference, they don't require it. Please see this quote below from chapter 6 of this book ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible