This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There should be a section about Domingos' comments about algorithmic biases in machine learning and the controversies that they have generated. I and other users have added one with a number of citations, but user Sir-lay has removed it multiple times. Such a section is necessary for providing information on the ongoing debates about diversity and ethics in machine learning. Domingos is a key figure of one side of this debate, and his page should reflect that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmcandre ( talk • contribs) 22:37, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
For what it's worth, the subject of this article dislikes some of its content. That's not an ironclad reason to remove it, but does require it to be immaculately sourced and NPOV. *Dan T.* ( talk) 21:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
In 2020, Domingo criticized the research and activism of multiple AI ethicists, most notably Timnit Gebru and Anima Anandkumar, drawing some criticism himself.
- How does this line convey any meaningful encyclopedic information to a reader is beyond me but congratulations on writing a NPOV line.
TrangaBellam (
talk)
11:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Hey folks. Did y'all ever reach a consensus on this? I just reverted an IP who was blanking a lot of the referenced material there because their rationale didn't seem to match up with the conversation here. But I'm not a normal watcher of this page and only found it while on recent changes patrol. I'd like to double check if a consensus was reached before I do so again, if it becomes necessary. Millahnna ( talk) 21:45, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There should be a section about Domingos' comments about algorithmic biases in machine learning and the controversies that they have generated. I and other users have added one with a number of citations, but user Sir-lay has removed it multiple times. Such a section is necessary for providing information on the ongoing debates about diversity and ethics in machine learning. Domingos is a key figure of one side of this debate, and his page should reflect that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmcandre ( talk • contribs) 22:37, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
For what it's worth, the subject of this article dislikes some of its content. That's not an ironclad reason to remove it, but does require it to be immaculately sourced and NPOV. *Dan T.* ( talk) 21:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
In 2020, Domingo criticized the research and activism of multiple AI ethicists, most notably Timnit Gebru and Anima Anandkumar, drawing some criticism himself.
- How does this line convey any meaningful encyclopedic information to a reader is beyond me but congratulations on writing a NPOV line.
TrangaBellam (
talk)
11:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Hey folks. Did y'all ever reach a consensus on this? I just reverted an IP who was blanking a lot of the referenced material there because their rationale didn't seem to match up with the conversation here. But I'm not a normal watcher of this page and only found it while on recent changes patrol. I'd like to double check if a consensus was reached before I do so again, if it becomes necessary. Millahnna ( talk) 21:45, 3 February 2023 (UTC)