Talk:List of algorithms

message: The "website review" link shouldn't be there, but I can't edit semi-protected pages yet. Anyone care to clean it up? ThomasTC (talk) 09:16, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spam under "Sequence alignment" heading 

message: The following is a list of the algorithms described in Wikipedia.
Perhaps I am mistaken about the purpose of this page, but I think algorithms that are not (yet) described in Wikipedia should not be in this list. I removed the following articles:
** Breadth first search
** Depth first search
** Random search: actually exists
** Predictive search: binary like search which factors in magnititude of search term versus the high and low values in the search.  Sometimes called a dictionary search.
** Sequential search
** Select sort for loop with a nested for loop
Sorry if I'm mistaken.
-- CYD
:I totally disagree. One of the key concepts of a wiki is that page authors can mention articles that do not yet exist. This prompts other authors who know about topic to create it. IE: It lets the reader (and thus potential author) know that there is a desire for that article. Also, I think the items should be in the list. Its a list. Its information in-and-of itself. By removing them, you imply that the algorithms themselves don't exist. Rlee0001 01:15 Oct 18, 2002 (UTC)
::It seems from a quick inspection that quite a few of these articles talk about the algorithm without actually specifying it (eg Bresenham's line algorithm). I was under the impression that the latter was the intent of this page: am I wrong? Phil 16:00, Nov 4, 2003 (UTC)
Also those algorithms should be added, that don't exist in Wikipedia yet, to initiate someone to write it. Steven 82.82.117.221 16:03, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  algorithms described in Wikipedia 

message: I've been looking around on the wikipedia and it seems that there are many algorithms that are left off this list (e.g. Levenshtein_distance, Longest-common subsequence problem). Has this page been deprecated by categories? (I still see value in this page as it adds short blurbs about the algorithms.) I'm asking because I'd like to add some of these, but I'm not sure where to put them without adding new sections (it seems a similar thing was discussed earlier). Ok, thanks! Horndude77 01:06, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In general, lists can peacefully coexist with categories, as they serve different purposes.  In the two specific cases you mention, I'm not sure I would include them here. Levenshtein distance is first and foremost a mathematical concept. Its definition raises the question of how it can be computed efficiently; that's an algorithmic problem. Finally, the standard dynamic programming algorithm for solving that problem is one solution among quite a few others (a well-known alternative is a recursive divide-and-conquer method). Such algorithmic solutions can and should of course be included in the present list. However, I'm not sure what to do about the underlying algorithmic problems and the more fundamental concepts involved in those problems. Similarly for the related longest common subsequence problem: it's primarily an algorithmic problem, for which there is more than one algorithmic solution. --MarkSweep 01:34, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other algorithms 

message: * Halló! method of generating most-perfect magic squares of order 2n is a draft about an algorithm and probably not following Wikipedia standards. I apologize for all spelling and editorial errors and would be happy of any review. It is a question to whom it should be attributed, if it was published in a similar form in modern times, described in ancient Indian of Jain texts etc. Best regards Gangleri | [ Th] | T 11:36, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  method of generating most-perfect magic squares of order 2<sup>n</sup> 

message: What do you think about keeping the category list in alpha order to make it simpler to find algorithms? Daniel.Cardenas 00:48, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are in alphabetical order. Deco 02:08, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List the Algo categories by alphabetical order? 

message: Hello,
I had a quick look and couldn't find a listing of the different performances (eg Big-O, worst case etc) for each algorithm, does one exist somewhere?
if not i might start it....
thanks 129.78.208.4 08:45, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a List of Algorithm Performances? 

message: Why isn't burstsort in the list? 87.118.102.154 12:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burstsort 

message: The list only provides a few links to arithmetic algorithms as practiced by humans and generally taught in traditional mathematics.  Should this be added as a new category?  Do pages describing these algorithms even exist?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.205.34.127 (talk) 14:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen some of these around (e.g. in multiplication algorithm and elementary arithmetic) but it's certainly an area lacking coverage. Dcoetzee 21:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arithmetic 

message: This article seems to pretty blatantly violate Wikipedia's policies against self-reference.  Why? -- 65.78.13.238 (talk) 22:27, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the self-reference? 

message: Were should compiler-oriented algorithms go?  I see two choices -- a new top level section "Compiler Algorithms" or the same under "Software Engineering".  I prefer the former, any opinions? Ergosys (talk) 03:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compiler Algorithms? 

message: The classification of sort algorithms into types here disagrees with the classifications at Sorting_algorithm#Comparison_of_algorithms. -- Beland (talk) 16:11, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction on sort algorithms 

message: It might be interesting to list the time complexity and space complexity for applicable algorithms, along the lines of Sorting_algorithm#Comparison_of_algorithms. -- Beland (talk) 16:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time and space complexity 

message: The A* algorithm is listed as a graph search algorithm, while Dijkstra's algorithm, which in fact is a special case of the A* algorithm, is listed as a shortest path finder. But what is really the difference between search algorithms and shortest path algorithms? May I suggest a merge of the two sections? —Kri (talk) 19:31, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Search'' vs. ''shortest path'' algorithms? 

message: I suggest creating a page on Computational complexity of common algorithms similar to Computational complexity of mathematical operations, can serve as a very useful reference page to those comparing the computational complexity of an algorithm
(Jalal0 (talk) 09:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page request 

message: If no one has any objections, I'd like to add some things to the statistics section. My hesitation stems from whether they, universally, be considered algorithms, in the strictest sense of the word. For example, there are many methods for automated binning, like Freedman–Diaconis rule, and Doane's formula. Should I include these?
Statethatiamin (talk) 15:44, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  More statistics algorithms 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of algorithms. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131006113018/http://glorfindel.mavrinac.com/~aaron/school/pdf/bay06_surf.pdf to http://glorfindel.mavrinac.com/~aaron/school/pdf/bay06_surf.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified