Discussion Forum » [[Trash.ForumForumGar][]] »

Peter Bacchetti's comments

It might help to evaluate and disclose the reliability of CTSpedia in terms of backup, down time, likely permanence of URLs (or will they change in some future changeover to UCSF's Virtual Home), what assurances are available about the permance of CTSpedia itself, etc. Should there be a mirror site somewhere else?

I would like to see less focus on content for the sake of having content. We could instead encourage development of content to meet specific needs. An example might be a page about sample size planning; we could start using that right away by having a link on the BREAD request form next to the sample size check box. Model text for use in replying to common criticisms from paper reviewers is another area that could be prioritized (I have a couple of things I could contribute).

The LogisticRegression page is a spearhead example of a fairly operational set of tools. It's not in perfect shape by any stretch, but it shows how to call tools directly from CTSpedia and illustrates some cool (I think) output that contains hyperlinks to CTSpedia entries. This could be highlighted as an example for how to contribute SAS tools.

There are a number of non-existent entires that are are already mentioned (as would-be links or red text) in some existing entries. These could be listed somewhere as desired contributions. If we post such lists, we should include a way to "check out" the topic so no one works offline only to find that someone else was also working on it offline. (I don't think the twiki environment is nice enough to assume that folks will always be willing to work directly in CTSpedia.)

A "what's new" or "highlights" entry on the main page might help make it more interesting. I could propose the ResultsInterpretation entry as something to look at and change or comment on.

Why is wikipedia mentioned on the main page as being covered by disclaimers. Is this an unupdated paste?

-- PeterBacchetti - 10 Apr 2008