Talk:Peter Nordin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 Archives |
|||
|
I see that Peter Nordin is mentioned in the Swedish National Encyclopedia NE, at least that the online version I have access too. He is refered to as a robot researcher.
Contents |
[edit] New start
This article needs more references that are not published by companies Peter Nordin is directly involved with. It is written as if by insider. Now the content that is sourced is almost completely taken from biographical written or published by someone involved in Peter Nordin's ventures. Also some references, books or articles written by Peter Nordin and not about him are named or hyperlinked, but the book or article can not verify opinion or value claims that are made in this article. What work has been done already to find more independent published sources to verify claims?Venado 22:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- The article was written by one person with very strong views on the subject (read the talk archives for information). I'm not sure there's anybody else at present qualified to clean up the article. I know I am not. -Nard 23:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- He is not in the Swedish wikipedia so is he notable only in English world?Venado 19:59, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
I see that Peter Nordin is mentioned in the Swedish National Encyclopedia NE, at least that the online version I have access too. He is refered to as a robot researcher. Janpersson (talk) 06:36, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Agree that the article is written in a gushing rather than neutral tone.
The current section headings are meaningless, because studies are discussed in the section after that heading, and his early career is discussed in the section before that heading.
Proposal: (this is an example for tone, not fact checked as I am not familiar with Nordin's biography and CV)
Unless he makes a point to go by his first name, use his last name.
If he is still alive and conducting research, the lead should not be in past tense: "Peter Nordin is a Swedish computer scientist noted for contributions in the fields of automatically generated computer programming, machine learning, and evolutionary robotics. He is currently (as of 2007) VP of Research at Institute of Robotics in Scandinavia AB (iRobis)."
"Peter Nordin was born in 1965 in Helsingborg. In 1967, his family moved to Gothenburg, where he was raised.
Nordin earned an M.S. in Computer Science from Chalmers University of Technology in 1988, then began his career in research and development of knowledge engineering technology for Infologics AB[1].
Nordin's work to stay current with research in the field of evolutionary algorithms led to interactions with other explorers of this new field, including several ESPRIT projects (explain what that is). He was one of the 13 researchers at the first international workshop about genetic engineering. (Did he help produce the conference or simply attend as an invited speaker?)
In 1993, Nordin started Dacapo AB,[2] a research and development company that grew to employ 80 people before it was sold in 1999. While at Decapo, he earned his PhD (in computer science?) from the University of Dortmund.
In 1996, Nordin became involved in an effort to create the first textbook on genetic programming[3]. (What does this mean? Did he write the text? Edit it? Contribute chapters?) In 1999, Peter created two companies (using genetic algorithm techniques?): VILL AB, a search engine company (does this mean they sold an engine? ran a competitor to Google?), and Tific AB (what specifically did they create in the field of AI?). In this year, he also received the year’s Sten Gustafsson prize for entrepreneuring, awarded by the Royal Swedish Academy of Engineering Sciences."
and so forth... After completing the biography, have a section about his research interests; indicate firsts when mentioning them.
I hope this helps provide a useful hint towards more appropriate style; my apologies for mangling the technical details of his work.
VisitorTalk 08:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] A former member of Meshuggah?
He's not, right? But the following article links to this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psykisk_Testbild —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.128.189.26 (talk) 01:34, August 24, 2007 (UTC)
Original Meshuggah bassist Peter Nordin participated in a "where is he now" discussion on the Meshuggah website forum. In a post from October 25, 2002, the bassist wrote, "Now I'm 30 years old." (http://www.tandjent.com/meshforum/viewtopic.php?t=52&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=nordin&start=40) If that's accurate, he couldn't be computer scientist Peter Nordin who was born in 1965. (For fans of the band, the bassist provides a lot of detailed reminiscence in this thread - but that doesn't have anything to do with the software engineer.) The Psykisk article should be edited to correct the erroneous link from the band's bass player to the subject of this article. VisitorTalk 08:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "Written like a resume"
Is that complaint still a concern with the new version of the article? If so, please advise how to correct. If the tag has become obsolete, please remove it. VisitorTalk 02:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Inconsistent views on Wikipedia writing standards
Rodney_Brooks article is somewhat more like the original version of the Peter Nordin article. (I should know. It's the model I used to write the Peter Nordin article.) The Brooks article has been critisized for not having enough references, which the original Peter Nordin had in abundance. The opinion that this article in written like a resume, appearing an the article page, conflicts with the more official rating given by the biographies group on the discussion page (where such opinion belongs). I think too often the process of critisizing written work becomes obstructive; arbitrarily finding fault in whatever is produced. Especially in non-fiction works, writing is driven by information. Critisism of the inclusion of extremely relevant information and references - just because they're there - deleting it, then complaining about the lack of relevant information and references - transforms the writing process into a long-term political battle. Rogerfgay 20:04, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- The Rodney Brooks article (as it is now, at least) is pure listcruft and trivia. I have no idea why you would take that as a model.
- But anyway, why are you so concerned about this article? If you cannot improve it any further, and if he really is as significant as you claim he is, someone else will come along and fix it — that is the purpose of maintenance tags, not criticizing anyone's work.
- Given that you admit you know the subject of this article in person, I would suggest you follow the conflict of interest guideline and let this article be. Alternatively you could stubbify it and remove the notice, if that gives you any more peace of mind. -- intgr [talk] 02:00, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
