Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test

Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page.

This is the talk page for discussing Wikipediholism test and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Department of Fun Bottom‑importance This page is supported by the Department of Fun, which aims to provide Wikipedians with fun so that they stay on Wikipedia and keep on improving articles. If you have any ideas, do not hesitate to post them to the discussion page or access our home page to join the Department of Fun. Bottom This page has been rated as Bottom-importance on the importance scale. WikiFun Police This article is within the scope of the WikiFun Police, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage and quality of fun articles on Wikipedia, including those tagged with {{humour}} and {{Humorantipolicy}}. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the Wikipedia talk:WikiFun Police discussion, see a list of open tasks, or submit a request for maintenance or coverage.

This page was nominated for deletion on April 2, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

Archives

Archive 1 (2005–2007) Archive 2 (2007–2011) Archive 3 (2011–2017)

This page has archives. Sections older than 91 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.

new semi question

so, I got to check "In class? (5)" (use ctrl+f) and I'm doing that right now. shouldn't that be extra? Twineee ^{talk Roc} 00:10, 4 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I literally made an account just to address this

On question 18.1 it should be "one in 6,950,195^2" (or whatever the number is at the time of you reading this) and my mathaholic ass can't handle Wikipedians not grasping basic probability math (even though statistics is the worst kind of math imo).

This page is semi-protected, so can someone please fix this or I might try to make some other edits so I can edit this later. OagNwoeMnoC625 (talk) 05:45, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well my maths skills is on the decline but I think it's right how it is because first you click on an article, which can be anything, then your chance of clicking on that same article is 1 in 6.9 million. It is just 6.9 million because the first article can be anything.

But I believe for the squared to be there, you'd have to choose a specific start article before you click 'random'. So for example you decided that the first article is Carpet again, and the second article is also carpet. Well the probability of the first article being Carpet is 1 in 6.9 million, and the probability of the second article being Carpet is also 6.9 million. So you multiply them together and that would be 1 in 6.9 million squared. ―Panamitsu (talk) 06:01, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK well I did got a bit too carried away with this little math thingy on a supposed humorous essay, but I did some more math on this and I figured out an equation that works for x Random Page clicks and n Wikipedia articles reachable from Random Page:

${\displaystyle RandomPage(x,n)={\frac {n(x-1){\binom {x-2}{n}}}{n^{n}}}={\frac {n(x-1)n!}{n^{n}\Gamma (n-x+3)}}}$

So for example, a clone Wikipedia site with only 5 articles actually can reach a one in 5 probability after approx. 4.49211261370864 clicks or 5 clicks after rounding up (per WolframAlpha).

So technically, a Wikipedian can reach a probability of one in 6,950,195 after some amount of Random Page clicks. It might just take a bit more Wikipediholism than the average Wikipedian to pull up this trick. And I can't calculate the aforementioned some as the number is a bit quite larger than what WolframAlpha can handle.

For some more references, I think it's possible to reach just any desired probabilities, even a 100% chance given the right amount of Random Page clicks. This can be seen as another case of the infinite monkey theorem I believe. OagNwoeMnoC625 (talk) 06:47, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're getting a little carried away. Of course, the more times you click, the more you are reducing your chancing of having never encountered two pages in a row, but that's not what the question referring to. No matter how many times you click the random button, the odd of getting any given page will be 1 in 6.9 million for any and every time you click. Question 18.1 is merely reflecting those odds. It's not taking into account the number of times you've clicked the button because that would be way to banausic. Diriector_Doc├─────┤^Talk_Contribs 22:38, 6 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]