Talk:Analytic Hierarchy Process

This article is under development as part of a specific academic project, and may therefore seem incomplete at times. For example, the references are presented in a temporarily brief form, important sections may be temporarily missing, etc. If you have something to add to the article, please discuss it here first. Louis F. Sander 07:58, 15 August 2007 (CDT)

It's getting a lot closer to being a complete article, but still be patient, and still please discuss proposed changes here. (The references went from crap to dynamite, IMHO. Also the Wikipedia article is entirely crap, so here's a place where we're definitely ahead.) Louis F. Sander 00:01, 21 August 2007 (CDT)

The "See also" section needs to be vetted by an AHP expert. It's unclear how these subjects relate to AHP, especially as they are covered in online encyclopedias. Louis F. Sander 08:13, 7 September 2007 (CDT)

Pretty interesting

Pretty interesting stuff, Lou. Now if only some certain policy makers in our government would get a handle on some of it~ :-)  —Stephen Ewen (Talk) 23:08, 7 October 2007 (CDT)

It IS interesting, and the government uses it a lot, but only in scattered pockets. If this article goes as I think it will, it will be the first encyclopedic coverage of AHP anywhere. (And I've corresponded with several of the biggest experts in the field about this.) There doesn't seem to be one brief, authoritative exposition of the subject anywhere in the world. AHP is covered in a large number of books and papers, but it appears that nobody has ever gathered and summed up all the elementary stuff. There are a ton of sources, and the challenge is to find the good, understandable stuff in them and pull it all together in one place. I'm about 75% there at this point, or at least I think I am.

My plan is to create an excellent article on CZ (where it's relatively free from meddlers), then move some of it to WP (where things are more widely covered by search engines, more good wikilinks are possible, etc.). The CZ article will always be better than the WP one, mainly due to CZ features like subpages, relative freedom from vandalism and editing by know-nothings, etc. If the article is as good as I think it will be, it will get a lot of attention from the AHP community. CZ could even use it as an example of the good, unique material over here, and of the advantages of CZ over WP.

What got me started on it is that the WP article about AHP is really, really bad, and efforts to improve it have been thwarted by nitpicking amateurs, experts who aren't good encyclopedia editors, edit wars over trivia, etc. (not to mention the difficulty of writing a good article on a complicated subject). I know next to nothing about "approved" articles on CZ, but if this one could be approved before WP sees it, it might be a very good thing. Louis F. Sander 06:24, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

If you do copy it over to wikipedia it will be interesting to see how it develops relative to the more stable version here. Chris Day (talk) 07:33, 8 October 2007 (CDT)

Notes copied from the article

Sorry, but it's not standard practice to have notes about the drafting of the article inline, in the article itself. I've moved them below. --Larry Sanger 19:13, 18 October 2007 (CDT)

I moved all this stuff to a Draft page. Also moved all but the intro from the main article there. The stuff in the main article is stable for now. All the rest is under development, and changing daily. I hope to have it all finished in a few days. In the meantime, I think we are all better off if there aren't too many versions hanging around in too many places. Louis F. Sander 22:46, 18 October 2007 (CDT)