- The question is tendentious. There'd be no question here had it been Katie Couric who'd said seven to three, versus making it a percent or offering, say, 21 to 49. There's absolutely no chance anyone who's successfully finished the sixth grade misunderstood her. Where's the request for references on an encyclopedic matter here? Just a request for opinion and debte, I see. μηδείς (talk) 05:51, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The actual numbers and source have nothing to do with the question. This is a question regarding a matter of usage. No different than, say, "Is it considered incorrect to mix American and English spellings in a text?". A precise reference would be great of course, but even without one, it is still valuable to know what the linguistic intuition of the respondents is. Many of the threads at the language desk amount to that, and the responses are still useful because the respondents act as linguistic informants. To generalize the question: Is it at all usual (except in the case of percentages) that ratios are expressed as fractions which haven't been been reduced to their simplest form. The Google Ngram Viewer gives this but I don't know how reliable those results are. Surely "eighty to twenty" must be more common than that. The WP page Fraction (mathematics) gives as an example "every two-tenths of a mile". Same thing. Why not "every one-fifth of a mile"? Is there a reason the editor has chosen the former? Contact Basemetal here 09:18, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- If it's a usage question, then why mention Ann Coulter? Why not ask if Kenyan-born presidents normally think the US has 57 states? Of course people use the ratio eight to two. μηδείς (talk) 17:06, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Because I wanted to give the exact source and context. In fact one of the respondents did ask "what was the context?". Except for that, neither Ann Coulter, nor what the ratio actually stood for had any importance. Can you give an actual example of someone using eight to two in writing, or more generally an example of someone using a non-reduced fraction (e.g. fifteen to five instead of three to one) to express a ratio? Contact Basemetal here 17:24, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, you struck out part of your question and added the part about the 2012 US presidential election after I had posted my response. Diff [1] but you didn't sign the change, so the original timestamp remained. Akld guy (talk) 20:08, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- You're correct but I'm not sure what you're driving at. Contact Basemetal here 20:25, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Under my original post, you said, "No, I provided above all the context that seemed relevant." Adding context after someone replies without mentioning the fact or timestamping the change is deceitful. Akld guy (talk) 20:59, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- "Deceitful" is not a charge you're entitled to make, Akld guy. It breaches WP:NPA. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 21:12, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Once again, just for Jack: adding context after being asked for it, and then rebuking me for asking, IS DECEITFUL. Akld guy (talk) 22:45, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Rebuked? Contact Basemetal here 22:58, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
|