Uhhm... {{sofixit}}...
Mark
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 22:56:29 +0200, NSK nsk2@wikinerds.org wrote:
On Monday 14 February 2005 21:03, Marco Krohn wrote:
nevertheless I very much agree that the Wikipedia is very good concerning mathematical topics.
Personally, one of the reasons I started the http://www.adapedia.org project (now being migrated to better software) was Wikipedia's terrible (NPOV: allegedly inadequate) coverage of Computer Science and Mathematics.
You don't have an article about quadratic classifiers. The Classifier article talks about linguistics. The Software agent article is as short as a kids' poem.
I have to recognise, however, that the naive bayes article is better. Perhaps because it's based on an excellent book, which I happen to possess for some years now.
-- NSK http://portal.wikinerds.org _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l