<p>Question  <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/222702/58675">https://stats.stackexchange.com/q/222702/58675</a> shows a classical <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Errors-in-variables_models" rel="nofollow noreferrer">errors-in-variables</a> model (and in particular, since the calibration curve looks polynomial, <a href="https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_least_squares" rel="nofollow noreferrer">total least square</a> may suffice). What is the right way to answer here? A link to the Wikipedia article is clearly not an acceptable answer. An answer which repeats, more or less, the Wikipedia exposition doesn't seem great too (it's total least squares...there isn't a lot more you can say, apart from the standard derivation). Should I simply point to the Wikipedia link in a comment? Or should I ask for actual data (a reproducible example), and give a real answer based on that? This would be better than just "copying" Wikipedia, because I would give an answer with actual numbers, maybe illustrating the use of some R package.</p>
