Talk:Strong law of small numbers

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

Statistics Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Guy's law

Guy's law is not mathematical folklore as he indeed published it. That silly remark should be removed.

Also his presentations are not proofs by intimidation as they are not meant to confuse the reader--they are just examples of the phenomenon (not a theorem) Guy presented. Just because one reader did not understand them does not give a reason to insult this first class mathematician's work. Proof by intimidation is an attempt to bully your opponent.

74.177.58.20 (talk) 01:08, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the term phenomenon is more appropriate than "law". The name is just a jocular nod to the Law of Large Numbers. It is unfortunate since people tend to get worked up and confused about "laws".

Of course papers by Guy were at the origin, and Dudley did much to bring it to a wider attention. But I would still say that the way we allude to it in the maths community is "folkloristic." In particular, the younger maths folk learn about it by osmosis, during banter in the common room over coffee and tea. I cannot imagine assigning Guy's actual paper to a student or post-doc to read. So "folklore" is not at all a silly remark (I was not OP for that remark). 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:5DF1:F6E6:D63D:13E0 (talk) 06:50, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization

@The Anome: shouldn't this article be at the sentence-case capitalization (Strong law of small numbers)? DMacks (talk) 03:10, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DMacks: You're right, and I've changed it accordingly. -- The Anome (talk) 07:21, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! DMacks (talk) 07:32, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]