Talk:Delphi method: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:37, 20 September 2011

Latest revision as of 06:47, 8 October 2024

(35 intermediate revisions by 24 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Talkheader}}

{{WikiProject Statistics}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|

{{WikiProject Futures studies }}

{{WikiProject Statistics|importance=low}}

}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config

| algo = old(365d)

| archive = Talk:Delphi method/Archive %(counter)d

| counter = 1

| maxarchivesize = 150K

| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}

| minthreadstoarchive = 1

| minthreadsleft = 2

}}

This article is imported from [[Everything2]].; see their [http://www.everything2.com/indextitle/Delphi+method Dephi method page].pl?node_id=669790

== Some moved content ==

== Consensus building or forecasting ? ==

@[[User:Uclneaxel|Uclneaxel]]: Since I'm unsure how this highly detailed sentence which you contributed [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Delphi_method&diff=prev&oldid=970302753 here] fits into the broader context, I'm moving it here for possible comment: <blockquote>The Delphi approach has been successfully employed to improve agreement between experts in iterative rating exercises on clinical test results using inter-rater kappa statistics as an outcome measure.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Petzold A, Biousse V, Bursztyn L, Costello F, Crum A, Digre K, Fraser C, Fraser JA, Katz B, Jurkute N, Newman N, Lautrup-Battistini J, Lawlor M, Liskova P, Lorenz B, Malmqvist L, Peragallo J, Sibony P, Subramanian P, Rejdak R, Nowomiejska K, Touitou V, Warner J, Wegener M, Wong S, Yu-Wai-Man P, Hamann S | display-authors = 6 | title = Multirater Validation of Peripapillary Hyperreflective Ovoid Mass-like Structures (PHOMS) | journal = Neuro-Ophthalmology | volume = 44 | issue = 6 | pages = 413–414 | date = 16 July 2020 | pmid = 33408429 | pmc = 7746256 | doi = 10.1080/01658107.2020.1760891 }}</ref></blockquote>

are the two concepts related ? same name for two different things ? [[User:Flammifer|Flammifer]] 02:55, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

{{Reflist-talk}}

:not the same thing at all. A single person can forecast stuff.--[[User:RichardVeryard|RichardVeryard]] 16:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[[Special:Contributions/86.161.190.114|86.161.190.114]] ([[User talk:86.161.190.114|talk]]) 15:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

:Thank you. I agree. [[User:Uclneaxel|Uclneaxel]] ([[User talk:Uclneaxel|talk]]) 18:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

==Lead section==

This article needs a coherent [[Wikipedia:Lead section|Lead section]]. &mdash; [[User:CatherineMunro|Catherine]]\^{[[User_talk:CatherineMunro|talk]]} 19:13, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

== RAND/UCLA appropriateness method ==

The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method is a notable absence under the variations subheading. It is commonly used in medical and clinical research settings with expert panels of specialist physicians.

== Philosophical grounding ==

I think the opening reference to Hegel is pretentious and probably inaccurate. The Linstone and Turoff book ([http://is.njit.edu/pubs/delphibook/ch2a.html Chapter 2a], [http://is.njit.edu/pubs/delphibook/ch2b.html Chapter 2b]) references Hegel among other philosophers, but identifies [[John Locke|Locke]], [[Edgar Arthur Singer|E A Singer]] and [[C. West Churchman]] as more significant figures. Has anyone got a source for a specifically Hegelian account of Delphi, or is this "original research". --[[User:RichardVeryard|RichardVeryard]] 16:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2023/10/generating-evidence-using-the-delphi-method.html

:Well, the dialectic process of thesis, antithesis and synthesis is Hegelian, so he does deserve to be mentioned - if the process actually is that important in Delphi method, which I my opinion is a statement that should indeed be referenced to somewhere. -- [[User:Flambergius|Flambergius]]

https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/2011/MR1269.pdf [[User:Instantwatym|Instantwatym]] ([[User talk:Instantwatym|talk]]) 03:01, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

But Hegel never used the triadic structure of "thesis, antithesis, and synthesis" in reference to his own systems! [[User:70.37.8.95|70.37.8.95]] 17:29, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

== Education Reform Section ==

I do not believe that the last section on Education Reform is relevant to the discussion on the Delphi method, and should be dropped. In fact, the use of the Delphi method is not even mentioned in the discussion of Education Reform, except to say that it is a "scam".

:Here is the old diff in case anyone's interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Delphi_method&diff=prev&oldid=68719030

:I've removed the [[Education reform]] category, since it was now meaningless. --[[User:Argav|Argav]] [[User talk:Argav|&#1758;]] 02:16, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

==Merge [[Delphi effect]]==

I see the [[Talk:Delphi effect|talk page discussion]], but even it seems to point towards [[Delphi effect]] being a redirect, and as that page says itself that the two terms are probably referring to the same thing, just named differently, merging would be quite appropriate. I'd do it, but I can barely understand what it all is. -[[User:Bbik|Bbik]]<span style="font-size:85%;">^{[[User talk:Bbik|★]]}</span> 19:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

:I'll do it here shortly. [[User:ImperfectlyInformed|ImpIn]] | ([[User_talk:ImperfectlyInformed|t]] - [[Special:Contributions/ImperfectlyInformed|c]]) 12:46, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

==Conflict of interest tag==

One of the citations in the article (to a paper by Green, Armstrong, and Graefe) was added by a single-purpose account, Agraefe, who has focused on promoting the work of Mr. Graefe; hence it's questionable whether the reference in question is truly necessary and relevant. I'm not an expert in the subject, but someone should look over it, and remove the tag and possibly the reference. [[User:Seleucus|Seleucus]] ([[User talk:Seleucus|talk]]) 16:37, 20 September 2011 (UTC)