avoiding forks (was Re: [Wikipedia-l] public service ads in Wikipedia?)

[NSK]

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