Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 327: |
Line 327: |
| Anyone notice how the explanations for the car-related frequencies are nonsensical? They're so nonsensical that I can't tell how to fix them without actually knowing the subject. Please fix.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.206|108.162.219.206]] 05:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC) | | Anyone notice how the explanations for the car-related frequencies are nonsensical? They're so nonsensical that I can't tell how to fix them without actually knowing the subject. Please fix.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.206|108.162.219.206]] 05:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC) |
| | | |
− | I'm filling in the remaining fields the best I can. I did the last one; Denver pizza. Math is not my strong point. It's probably a joke statistic, but someone may want to double-check my math. I didn't see any figures for Denver's pizza consumption, but I figured it was one of those things where it just maybe worked out to match the Denver population. {{unsigned|4jonah}} | + | I'm filling in the remaining fields the best I can. I did the last one; Denver pizza. Math is not my strong point. It's probably a joke statistic, but someone may want to double-check my math. I didn't see any figures for Denver's pizza consumption, but I figured it was one of those things where it just maybe worked out to match the Denver population. |
− | | |
− | | |
− | All fields are now filled out to the best of my ability. I have not edited ones already completed, but finished empty ones as accurately as possible. {{unsigned|4jonah}}
| |
− | | |
− | "About half of all cyclists have their bikes stolen, oftentimes more than once, but riders have a 90% chance of theft, all according to this report." It's a very confusing sentence and doesn't match the data in the linked report. About half of all people who ''ever'' cycle get their bikes stolen at some point. People who cycle ''every day'' are 90% more likely to have their bike stolen than people who cycle infrequently. Not 90% chance of theft. I will update this if nobody objects. [[User:AmbroseChapel|AmbroseChapel]] ([[User talk:AmbroseChapel|talk]]) 23:47, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
| |
− | | |
− | | |
− | | |
− | Not sure if it's the sort of interesting fact that should be added or not, but under the "Sagittarius named Amelia" section, that link to the Baby Name Wizard shows the peak popularity for the name "Amelia" was in 2012. The character of Amelia Pond was on Doctor Who from 2010 to mid-2012, and that was also the height of the immense popularity in America of Matt Smith playing the title role. Might be the source of the popularity of that name. Also, does the previous analysis take into account the fact that Sagittarius named Amelia wouldn't start drinking soda until they are at least a few years old? Would taking out all the ones under the age of five or six let us bring back in SNA in the rest of the world, given that soda is much more popular in America than elsewhere? [[User:CritterKeeper|CritterKeeper]] ([[User talk:CritterKeeper|talk]]) 19:00, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
| |
− | | |
− | | |
− | Anyone want to help calculate the odds of all of these flashing at the same time? [[User:IJustWantToEditStuff|IJustWantToEditStuff]] ([[User talk:IJustWantToEditStuff|talk]]) 01:01, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
| |
− | :If I have all the timings entered correctly (because I just did it on a calculator when I should have gone with a script on the source data) it's... Approximately 2.77x10<sup>46</sup> years.
| |
− | :That's because I have factorised the ms durations of each gif (as given above, give or take a typo) and the lowest common multiple is built up as being (2⁷ * 3⁵ * 5⁴ * 7 * 11 * 13 * 19 * 23 * 29² * 31 * 41 * 43 * 47 * 67 * 71 * 79 * 83 * 103 * 127 * 139 * 211 * 269 * 277 * 311 * 401 * 503 * 701 * 1213) milliseconds... But feel free to validate my assumptions. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.4|172.70.86.4]] 03:50, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
| |