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