Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Oct 19, 2022 at 18:05 history wiki removed kjetil b halvorsen
Oct 24, 2014 at 22:24 comment added kolonel @whuber Okay I will make an attempt to improve. thanks.
Oct 24, 2014 at 22:23 comment added whuber You might start with combining the two posts--the answer and your comment--and then think about weeding out (or relegating to an appendix or clarifying) any material that may be tangential. For instance, the reference to undefined means as yet has no clear bearing on the question and so it remains somewhat mysterious.
Oct 24, 2014 at 22:21 comment added kolonel @whuber No problem. Can you recommend an edit?
Oct 24, 2014 at 22:18 comment added whuber Thank you. The remarks in that comment seem to be better focused on the question than your original answer is! You might consider updating your answer at some point to make your opinions and advice more apparent.
Oct 24, 2014 at 22:16 comment added kolonel I am against it, but I also want to be careful than just saying it is useless as I don't know the entire set of possible scenarios out there. There are many tests that depend on the normality assumption. Saying that normality testing is useless is essentially debunking all such statistical tests as you are saying that you are not sure that you are using/doing the right thing. In that case you should not do it, you should not do this large section of statistics.
Oct 24, 2014 at 20:54 comment added whuber "...empirically it is very hard..." seems to argue against, rather than for, distributional testing. This is strange to read in a paragraph whose introduction suggests there are indeed uses for distributional testing. What, then, are you really trying to say here?
S Oct 24, 2014 at 20:00 history answered kolonel CC BY-SA 3.0
S Oct 24, 2014 at 20:00 history made wiki Post Made Community Wiki by kolonel