Ronnykoh

Randomized experiment revisions

I'm not going to get into a revision war with you over Randomized experiment, but I think the content you've added would be better at A/B testing because it's out of context on the experimental page, which should be geared toward a more general audience. I'm also concerned that it's self-promotional, which is why I undid it. Can you revise and/or move? --Thosjleep (talk) 06:45, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

• I think A/B testing gets its own article because it's a relatively important paradigm shift in web design, commerce, etc. in the same way that clinical trials get their own page even though they are generally all randomized experiments or observational studies, both of which are described on general readership articles. Randomized experiment definitely needs expansion in general, but I think keeping a separate A/B testing page makes sense and it can be referenced in a short section on randomized experiment describing it as an application of experimental approaches. Just my two cents. --Thosjleep (talk) 09:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

• If you can make a coherent section at Randomized experiment out of the content from A/B testing and redirect from there, go for it. --Thosjleep (talk) 18:50, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Ronnykoh, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Ronnykoh! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ryan Vesey (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)