7 thoughts on “Scholarpedia article on Bayesian Statistics

  1. Gb: It takes work. There are a lot of different wikipedia articles on Bayes and they all have serious problems. If I were to just replace them with the Scholarpedia article, I'm afraid that people would get annoyed. But it would be a lot of work to rewrite each individual article. If anyone out there would like to do this, I agree that it would be a useful service.

  2. If you re-wrote the Wikipedia article, it might get un-re-written, and you might end up with one of those nasty revision / re-revision arguments I've heard about re Wikipedia.

    Plus, since the Scholarpedia articles have actual articles and have some level of review, they might "count" a bit in those counts academics have to worry about.

    In theory, Scholarpedia is a great idea and it will be interesting to see if it catches on. Having the pages look just like Wikipedia is good: It may be noted that utilization of an iconic schematic paradigm facilitates and optimizes mental assimilation. ;)

Comments are closed.