Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simplified swarm optimization: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Salix alba (talk | contribs) reply to DeVerm untested algorithm |
No edit summary |
||
Line 35:
*'''Comment''' Like everyone else here I agree that this article doesn't stand up to [[WP:N]], hence the reason I did not go for keeping it. But I do not understand why it should be deleted instead of merged into it's parent article because imho it's clear that this isn't a hoax, as it's clear to most editors that vote to delete here too. I do think that it can be merged into a section of [[Particle_swarm_optimization]] --[[User:DeVerm|DeVerm]] ([[User talk:DeVerm|talk]]) 12:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC).
:Now the algorithm may well be an improvement to the PSO or it may not. I'm not qualified to judge. Indeed we only have the authors word that it is better as the technical report has not been peer reviewed which would offers at least a basic check. Further as there are no citations no one else in the academic community has looked at the algorithm. So we are suggesting adding an untested algorithm to PSO article. Potentially this could have serious consequences as we essentially give our recommendation to the algorithm and if it were to turn out to have a serious bug some third party could be badly affected. --[[User:Salix alba|Salix]] ([[User talk:Salix alba|talk]]): 13:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
:: The thing is, besides not having any outside references, there isn't enough new information about this to warrant putting it on the PSO page. The only thing new about it is the method to choose the position. DPSOs in general are more notable and those aren't mentioned either. [[User:Snaphat|snaphat]] ([[User talk:Snaphat|talk]]) 14:05, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
| |||