This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics
This article has gone through a PROD, but still has issues as it is based on one secondary textbook claim that his work on model-based clustering matters. It was created directly by a novice editor (Stat3472 33 edits). The article model-based clustering supports him as the inventor, but whether this is big enough for notability is unclear. Ldm1954 (talk) 09:53, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wolfe invented model-based clustering and this has grown into a large field of research. Articles on model-based clustering have been cited over 25,000 times by scientific papers, according to Google Scholar. Also, the leading software packages that implement model-based clustering (mclust and flexmix) have been downloaded over 14 million times, according to datasciencemeta.com. These are huge numbers for scientific work, and attest to the very long-lasting impact of Wolfe's work from 50 years ago, as many of the citations are recent.
His work has truly stood the test of time, and so readers should be able to read about his career. To delete this short article would require removing the link from the article on Model-Based Clustering, and readers will surely be curious to read about who invented the field. Stat3472 (talk) 21:16, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that you are new to Wikipedia, so you need to understand many details as there are accepted norms which you have to follow.
Any article by Wolfe is a primary source, and less relevant.
You need articles which discuss the importance and are objective and independent. In the paragraph above you make a claim of 25K and the article has terms such as "huge impact". While this might be true, these statements are not backed by evidence. They are also bragging, what we call peacock.
Please look at the do's and don'ts page, and read some of the other pages it links to.
Wolfe may be notable enough for a page. However, what you currently has does not convince. You (not me) have to do this with hard evidence within the article. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:48, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for these extremely helpful comments, as I am indeed new to Wikipedia. I have edited the article again, trying to bring it more in line with your guidance. I have added several additional secondary sources. I have also given some backing for the 25K claim, and removed the term "huge impact". I will appreciate any further guidance and pointers. Stat3472 (talk) 21:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good job, it is much better. One thing you need to cleanup is the referenced. We use a format such as ".[1][2]", i.e. the ref after punctuation and no spaces. If you use the citation tool it will also often find links for you. As an example see R package, which also has links to some author names as well. (I rarely do that as it is too much work.)
I removed the "primary" tag as you now have secondaries. I left the "expert" as I don't know enough about the inner workings of this area. If nobody responds after a month (possible) I will remove it. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I have corrected the format for the references.
By the way, I reduced the claim of 25K citations to 20K just to be on the safe side. When I did the calculation from Google Scholar, I got 24,669 citations, and I'm sure I missed quite a few, whence the 25K. But the argument doesn't depend on the exact number, and I can stand over 20K with no hesitation. Thanks again for reminding me to err on the side of caution! Stat3472 (talk) 00:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. You might want to include links in the refs themselves, although a bot may do this for you. The links make it easier to jump to the papers. Ldm1954 (talk) 00:22, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
