Feb-2013: SAS (software)
Hi Krexer. I have a disclosed conflict of interest with SAS (software) in that I frequently consult them on how to participate on Wikipedia on a public relations basis. I was looking at the page and noted your comment on the Criticisms section. I wanted to introduce myself, hope that we might collaborate on the article in the future and offer some general thoughts.
- It would be an improvement to delete the unsourced Criticism section, which violates WP:Criticism as well with a non-neutral header, but I will say at least some of these are verifiable, even if not currently sourced. What would be even better is a sourced and balanced "Reception" section. At the moment the verdict at SAS is that we are ill-equipped to write this section on account of our COI.
- A "Competitors" section with a list is almost always link-bait. Like the Criticisms section, I would consider it an improvement to delete the entire section, but even better to replace with a better analysis. There's a good example of this here. Again, I am probably not the best person to do this.
- I would like to work with SAS to offer a "Version History" and a "Technical Description" section to replace the Description, History and Components sections. In these cases the corresponding experts at SAS are probably the best people to author them. I think the components list violates "not a directory" and the Code Example violates "not a how-to"
Being that you are a subject-matter expert, I would love to work together on improving the article a bit if you're interested.
- Good ideas. Thanks for contacting me. I was hoping that my suggestion on the SAS Talk page would start a little conversation. Then if there seemed to be some consensus, I would then delete or modify the Criticism section. Even though you have a COI, I encourage you to add your ideas to the SAS Talk page. I think that your input on there would be fine, and I think that is what Talk pages should be for. Without hearing from other people, I'm reluctant to delete the section.
- I'll take a look at the example "competition" section that you referred to. Yes, I agree that a thoughtful analysis would be better than a list. But I think that a list (even with its challenges) is better than just deleting the section.
- I don't have enough knowledge about SAS version history and technical description, so I don't think I can make serious contributions to those sections.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited KXEN Inc., you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SAP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
- Great, glad the bot pointed this out. I have now revised the SAP link to properly point to SAP AG.Karl (talk) 19:32, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Dec-2013: Fixing brackets in Decision tree learning
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Decision tree learning may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- of one or more decision tree algorithms. Several examples include Salford Systems CART (which licensed the proprietary code of the original CART authors<ref name="bfos"/>, [[SPSS Modeler|