This is an old revision of this page, as edited by The Evil Spartan (talk | contribs) at 16:38, 3 November 2008 (→Crystal clear, to me!: re). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 16:38, 3 November 2008 by The Evil Spartan (talk | contribs) (→Crystal clear, to me!: re)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
 Archives | |||||
|
|||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Arizona poll
You have marked the Zimmermann/Marketing Intelligence poll recently posted at Statewide opinion polling for the United States presidential election, 2008 as partisan, based − as it seems − on an article by the ”Arizona Daily Star“. However, the press release by the polling firms insists that “The survey was not commissioned by any political party or candidate.” and pollster.com describes the two pollsters as “non-partisan research and public relations firms”. I'm not sure which course to follow with this one, but I cannot see overwhelming proof of any bias. However, maybe we should just wait for the new Arizona poll by Rasmussen to be released soon. That should give us an accurate trend. FanofPolling (talk) 15:02, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
- If you read the edit summary, I gave the reason: the poll was done by Democratic pollsters. The star specifically says "a poll commissioned by an organization affiliated with a specific candidate"; it exactly fits this definition. As such, you will notice fivethirtyeight did not mention it. The Evil Spartan (talk) 02:24, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Crystal clear, to me!
I see you have removed my explanation of the difference between a glass half full, or half empty. Citing it as "original research" It's hardly that ! You say you are interested in linguistics. Well, this is a prime example; if you use the French language to solve the question it becomes crystal clear, like the water in the glass !Kaienana (talk) 10:09, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
- I do like linguistics; perhaps I was a bit quick to remove it. I was also concerned that the tone was a bit unprofessional sounding. Feel free to add something similar that would address any of these concerns! The Evil Spartan (talk) 16:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)