User talk:Jtp15

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi JakeChapman, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

  • Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
  • Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.

How you can help:

Additional tips...

  • Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The Image:Wikisigbutton.png button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
  • If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
  • If you'd like to tell us about yourself and meet other new users, be sure to introduce yourself at our new user log.
Good luck, and have fun. -- Mdd (talk) 22:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Systems

Thanks for joining the Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems. We can certainly use all the help we can get, especially from experts in the field like you with lots of experience. If you have some questions please let me know. -- Mdd (talk) 22:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Expert system

Hi, your latest change of the Expert system is not acceptable, because all articles start with a definition even if this definition is not perfect. I do like the descreption you made here, but that is typical a (very good) start for an overview section. So please take an other look at the ariticle and add a "global" defintion as a first sentence or sooner or later somenbody else will do that. -- Mdd (talk) 09:32, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

As an example I entered a first definition. For me, It doesn't matter so much if the definition is exactly right, but it has to give the context of the article. In that sentence software, system and knowledge was mentioned, so that was ok for me. If you have a better definition the article is all yours. Good luck -- Mdd (talk) 09:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I have actually been posting most of my thoughts on this article on the talk page comments ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Expert_system/Comments ). Is this incorrect? As a practitioner with more than three decades of experience building literally hundreds of expert systems, a CalTech masters degree in Computer Science, and a thesis on artificial intellegence including set and systems theory, I tend to be a stickler for accuracy in this field. I actually was a contributor to Mycin in 1981, 82 on the PDP9 because of my expertise with VAX. However, in the interest of effective collaboration, I am willing to concede to peer review. I appreciate your approach and criticism, but the definition as is currently stated is incorrect. I am willing to help as long as ego does not outweigh expertise. I am avoiding all references to my own published papers, abstracts, and essays in the interest of the Wikimedia guidelines against self-aggrandizement.

--jtp15 (talk) 04:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)