Talk:Partial least squares regression
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Moving this article to Partial Least Squares
I think this article should be moved to "Partial Least Squares" for three reasons.
- 1. That's what I've always heard it stands for.
- 2. The SAS link refers to it that way.
- 3. Google returns the usual large number of results for that title, and only 3 pages for the current title.
I'll change it in the next few days unless there is comment here on reasons not to. Spalding 11:16, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
- I would strongly disagree with that. The style on Wikipedia is to minimize the use of capitals. The only articles I saw having all words starting with capitals are for people, and for book titles.
- If you change this, you would also need to change least squares, and linear least squares and linear regression. I think this would be unacceptable. Wonder what others think. Oleg Alexandrov 16:12, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
- What I meant was Partial least squares, replacing linear with least. I wasn't thinking about capitalization when I typed that. I think the only other article that would have to be changed if we rename this article is the one or two that link here. Spalding 19:32, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
- Good point. Yes, I like the "least" thing more, and is more used. Oleg Alexandrov 19:53, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
- What I meant was Partial least squares, replacing linear with least. I wasn't thinking about capitalization when I typed that. I think the only other article that would have to be changed if we rename this article is the one or two that link here. Spalding 19:32, May 9, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Reference validity/appropriateness?
I'm not clear on what the protocol for referencing in Wikipedia is, but I have to admit that the three Abdi references strike me as unusual. I appreciate that Prof. Abdi, or one of his students, is willing to share the work, but are these the right references? They're not primary references, they're not necessarily free of copyright, they're not in a refereed journal (not that book chapters are bad, of course), they are otherwise extremely random (why Abdi?), and a simple "whois" on those edits shows that they came from the same school as the author. Is this appropriate? Or should we be happy that the work is being shared and keep the references as is?