02:4902:49, 12 October 2018diffhist+536
Ling Tong
Authors (science field or not) know when to use numbers. When they're used, they do comparison, measurement and label at the same time. Let's go to talk page fore more detailTag: Undo
02:3002:30, 12 October 2018diffhist+69
Ling Tong
Clarify on the number counting "problem". Common knowledge like understanding primitive numeric values can HARDLY be an original research...
02:2302:23, 12 October 2018diffhist+467
Ling Tong
The last edit isn't counted as SYNTH (policy forbidding original research by synthesis). I already pointed out the numbers are explicitly provided by the author,
Chen Shou. There is NO NEW conclusion or original research produced. Mention of different numbers and comparing them are not a research. If you do research in such manner, I don't understand how you get your work published. Synthesis of published material to IMPLY a new conclusion is a way we do research. I don't see that here.Tag: Undo
11:4011:40, 10 October 2018diffhist+464
Ling Tong
Numbers can't have good faith. Numeric values are primitive data, which we use to do simple statistic and arithmetic . As Math and Statistic are common knowledge, we don't really need to draw a number line and show mathematical symbol that denotes an inequality between two values, right? Anyway, I added a brief explanation. Note: Sanguozhi does explicitly give out kill count numbers, Chen Shou wouldn't do it without a purpose, it's just most readers usually are not sensitive to numbers.
02:4902:49, 12 October 2018diffhist+536
Ling Tong
Authors (science field or not) know when to use numbers. When they're used, they do comparison, measurement and label at the same time. Let's go to talk page fore more detailTag: Undo
02:3002:30, 12 October 2018diffhist+69
Ling Tong
Clarify on the number counting "problem". Common knowledge like understanding primitive numeric values can HARDLY be an original research...
02:2302:23, 12 October 2018diffhist+467
Ling Tong
The last edit isn't counted as SYNTH (policy forbidding original research by synthesis). I already pointed out the numbers are explicitly provided by the author,
Chen Shou. There is NO NEW conclusion or original research produced. Mention of different numbers and comparing them are not a research. If you do research in such manner, I don't understand how you get your work published. Synthesis of published material to IMPLY a new conclusion is a way we do research. I don't see that here.Tag: Undo
11:4011:40, 10 October 2018diffhist+464
Ling Tong
Numbers can't have good faith. Numeric values are primitive data, which we use to do simple statistic and arithmetic . As Math and Statistic are common knowledge, we don't really need to draw a number line and show mathematical symbol that denotes an inequality between two values, right? Anyway, I added a brief explanation. Note: Sanguozhi does explicitly give out kill count numbers, Chen Shou wouldn't do it without a purpose, it's just most readers usually are not sensitive to numbers.