I recently came across this question that boasts a statistic about strongholds generating under villages in Minecraft Bedrock Edition:
Strongholds have a 1/10 chance to spawn under a village; does this also apply to abandoned villages? If so, does the reason for abandonment have any impact to this statistic?
The author also boasted this statistic in an answer to another question, a few days prior:
There is a 1/10 chance that a stronghold will be under a village. Edit: to clarify: I do not know if this statistic is still accurate. I see no reason why it wouldn’t be still.
Supporting documentation of this statistic is absent in both posts. Furthermore, when the user was questioned in a comment on how they could be sure about the statistic, they stated that it was "explained while analyzing the world record speed run"
...a speedrun with the time 13 min 6 seconds held (or still holds) the world record. When analyzed, it was explained that there is a 1/10 chance for strongholds to spawn under villages. That’s how I know.
However, this is not sufficient evidence to support the statistic, and as such, the statistic can mislead future readers if it is incorrect.
Should posts containing statistical information be required to show supporting evidence? This could come in official forms of:
- Code Snippets
We could also allow quotes from fandom wiki articles (as we already do) since the authors of those usually put large amounts of effort into verifying their content prior to posting.
Exceptions could be made for support provided as mathematical evidence, so long as the figures utilized in the proof are provided from official sources.
- If yes, then should we remove unsupported statistics from dated posts as we come across them?
- This is probably overkill, but at least worth asking.