Talk:Information retrieval

message: This article is missing major concepts. For example, there is no mention of page rank (!) or the receiver operating characteristic in evaluation, or multimedia IR. I agree precision/recall -- ROC -- evaluation might do better in a separate page. 67.101.41.94 (talk) 18:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huge gaps in article 

message: One thing I missed when I read this article was that information retrieval was not broken down into smaller subfields.
It might be helpful to break this field down when developing the article further.
Nybbles 10:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Break IR down into subfields 

message: They are listed in open-source IR systems but according to their respective websites, their licenses do not seem to be open-source anymore. I don't know if they were open-source or not in the past, so I didn't remove them. Maybe someone with more knowledge on the subject could take care of the issue ?
--Lastrainson 09:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glimpse / Webglimpse 

message: Hi there, I'd like to suggest a new article on the full history of information handling/management/techonology (details). I'm not knowledgeable enough to do it myself, but contributors here probably are. Thanks, JackyR | Talk 18:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article request 

message: Also add an article about information scent, as also noted on 
information foraging. Jidanni (talk) 18:35, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Information scent

message: I am going to start a new page on TermDiscrimination.  I am a noob, so can some one give me some pointers on how to get this article linked to?
Dspattison (talk) 18:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Term Discrimination 

message: The ASIS&T Award of Merit, established in 1964 by the Delaware Valley Chapter, is now the Society's highest honor, bestowed annually to an individual who has made a noteworthy contribution to the field of information science, including the expression of new ideas, the creation of new devices, the development of better techniques and outstanding service to the profession of information science. The Award of Merit is sponsored directory by the Society.
Past recipients of the Award of Merit:
* 2008 	Clifford Lynch
* 2007 	Donald H. Kraft
* 2006 	Blaise Cronin, ARIST editor, Indiana University
* 2005 	Marcia Bates
* 2004 	Howard D. White
* 2003 	Nicholas J. Belkin
* 2002 	Karen Sparck Jones
* 2001 	Patrick G. Wilson
* 2000 	Donald R. Swanson
* 1999 	Jose Marie Griffiths
* 1998 	Henry Small
* 1997 	Dagobert Soergel
* 1996 	Jean Tague-Sutcliffe
* 1995 	Tefko Saracevic
* 1994 	Harold Borko
* 1993 	Robert M. Hayes
* 1992 	Robert S. Taylor
* 1991 	Roger K. Summit
* 1990 	P. Atherton Cochrane
* 1989 	Gerard Salton
* 1988 	F. Wilfrid Lancaster
* 1987 	Donald W. King
* 1986 	Bernard M. Fry
* 1985 	Robert L. Chartrand
* 1984 	Joseph D. Becker
* 1983 	Dale B. Baker
* 1982 	Andrew A. Aines
* 1981 	Herbert S. White
* 1980 	Claire K. Schultz
* 1979 	Frederick Kilgour
* 1978 	Calvin N. Mooers
* 1977 	Allen Kent
* 1976 	Laurence Heilprin
* 1975 	Eugene Garfield
* 1974 	Manfred Kochen
* 1973 	Jesse H. Shera
* 1972 	Phyllis Richmond
* 1971 	Jerold Orne
* 1970 	Cyril W. Cleverdon
* 1968 	Carlos A. Cuadra
* 1967 	Robert Fairthorne
* 1966 	Mortimer Taube
* 1965 	Charles P. Bourne
* 1964 	Hans Peter Luhn
Cited by --KYPark (talk) 19:22, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ASIS&T Award of Merit 

message: * Thomas Bayes
* Claude E. Shannon
* Gerard Salton
* Hans Peter Luhn 
* W. Bruce Croft - Cambridge
* Karen Spärck Jones - Cambridge
* C. J. van Rijsbergen - Cambridge
* Stephen E. Robertson - Cambridge 
* Martin Porter - Cambridge
; My comment
The first two, Bayes and Shannon, were not contributing to information retrieval (hence rather irrelevant) but statistical inference in general. 
The next two, Luhn and Salton, were frontal, computational and experimental, helplessly suffering from lack of decent relevant IR theories.
The rest are Cambridge alumni or affiliates. They were especially keen on statistical approaches, which make up a part of what IR is all about as an average science. 
The keyword web and the citation web are the two driving wheels of IR, not to mention any information search or research as well as (esp. new)  encyclopedism. Hence the pivotal role of hypertext in principle and practice, around which a variety of statistical and computational methods may center. Frankly, the major figures, as biased as above, have little to do with such a central role obvious since late 1970s. --KYPark (talk) 21:21, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major figures 

message: The question answering article begins "In information retrieval, question answering (QA) is the task of automatically answering a question posed in natural language."  Yet there is no mention of question answering in this article. pgr94 (talk) 17:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question answering 

message: There's a little mistake in adaptation of Kuropka's categorization. It should be "Binary Independence", instead of "Binary Interdependence". I don't know how to edit this part (I'm pretty new to this and it's a graphic).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.176.147.82 (talk) 02:42, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graphic Help 

message: I propose that Webometrics be merged into this article, or one of its peers which tackles Web specific information retrieval metrics.
The article seems slim to me. It seems poorly referenced, with many researchers appearing in more than one reference at the same time. Most of the see-also links seem to be supporting the article, rather than leading to more information. The article also appears to link only to the kinds of other articles, which I now gather it should be merged into. Its prime content also has to do with "web impact", which is a form of information retrieval metric; an "impact factor".
As such, please consider Webometrics for merge into this article, and others near it, as the case may be. Decoy (talk) 20:20, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: The article Gain (information retrieval) has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gain (information retrieval).  As no one has yet commented on the nomination, I'm posting this message here in hopes of attracting editors familiar with the subject matter. —Psychonaut (talk) 08:47, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion nomination for [[Gain (information retrieval)]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Information retrieval. 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/20130928060217/http://www.scribd.com/doc/13742235/Information-Retrieval-Data-Structures-Algorithms-William-B-Frakes to https://www.scribd.com/doc/13742235/Information-Retrieval-Data-Structures-Algorithms-William-B-Frakes
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111120074515/http://pascallin.ecs.soton.ac.uk/challenges/VOC/pubs/everingham10.pdf to http://pascallin.ecs.soton.ac.uk/challenges/VOC/pubs/everingham10.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121208201457/http://icpr2010.org/pdfs/icpr2010_ThBCT8.28.pdf to http://icpr2010.org/pdfs/icpr2010_ThBCT8.28.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) 21:50, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I think this aspect could do with more fleshing out, with regard to the processes involved and as subtopic of library or information science. The article seems to be heavily focussed on how and what computers do, rather than the principles and key elements behind making the information retrievable. I'm just going to add a source in Further reading for now, as a starting point for further expansion. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Focus is too narrow