Talk:Rexer's Annual Data Miner Survey

April 2011: Notability dispute

I would like to dispute the notability tag added by User:Melcombe to the Rexer's Annual Data Miner Survey article. Unlike statistics, data mining is a relatively young and interdisciplinary field. Not as much writing has been done for it. I should think it significant that 735 participants from 60 countries participated in the most recent 2010 survey. Moreover, each year more people become involved with the survey each year. Compare this with other surveys that have articles on Wikipedia. --Luke145 (talk) 20:14, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello Luke145. Thanks for pointing me to this. However, I could not care much less about Rexer: it's about industrial data mining and I'm in research. The only time I've heard of them was on Wikipedia, and I cannot access their results. So I don't care about this article. Understand that this is not a deletion request. Right now, it is just a call for finding references that are based on this survey. Because: what good is a huge survey is the results are not read / published / used anywhere? Right at this moment I have an article in front of me called "data mining tools", doi:10.1002/widm.24; not so much about software use but about software availability. I havn't read it yet, but it does not seem to mention the rexer survey either. So we could really need some "proof of notability" for this article. --Chire (talk) 20:22, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

HI Just as a little sidenote, there are not many secondary sources at all, nor tertiary ones. Most relevant it seems, as far as I have got in a quick five minute search, is this one Data mining with neural networks ... using the R/rminer Tool

Secondly, editors stating they "do not care about this article" and "I could not care much less about Rexer" is not really sending an appropriate message where another editor is asking for help, although I understand that English might not be an editors first language.

It seems to me that there may be notability for Karl Rexer and then sections could be added to his page for the Analytics company and their annual survey. I would start with creating a Karl Rexer article and merge this article to that one. Chaosdruid (talk) 18:36, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry if I appeared offensive. FWIW, KDNuggets latest poll on data mining software [1] had 912 voters. Except the article found by Chaosdruid I could find no mentioning of the Rexer Survey in scientific literature (which actually is a bit surprising; especially given it apparently has been around for so long). KDNuggets seems to be much more popular here, too (e.g. DOI above). --Chire (talk) 21:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

These comments have been posted for quite some time, with no change. I want to address a number of previous comments in this section. First, the article addresses a rapidly changing field. I have been researching statistical and data mining software packages for close to a year, and these surveys were one of the first, and most detailed, resources I found for data mining information. Second, the comment that these tools do not apply to research are your experience, in your particular research area. The survey itself looks at a wide variety of fields where data mining tools are used, including research. I work with national datasets, and data mining essentially takes the place of initial data cleaning and preparation, in some cases. Third, I just searched Google Scholar for references to the Rexer Data Miner Survey, and 275 results appeared. Granted, some of those are to the actual surveys, and several are to articles which happen to have similar phrases, but I went through the first several pages, and most of the references are actual citations of one or more surveys in research articles. Finally, the comment that the results are not presented or published may stem from a failure to outline all of the details behind the survey. Survey highlights are presented at the annual Predictive Analytics World conference, and they have also been presented at several Oracle- and SPSS-sponsored annual conferences. If there are no additional comments, I will update the article with recent survey data (now known as the Data Science Survey) and remove the tags that appear to have been addressed.Vpitman (talk) 20:18, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I too would like to dispute the notability tag added by User:Melcombe to the Rexer's Annual Data Miner Survey article. I was quite surprised to see it questioned if the main source of information regarding data mining was notable. I understand how most things in an encyclopedia are based on topics that are referenced in many books or articles but this is a fairly new field. There are of course many books and article about data mining but they are not focused on the year-to-year changes that are reflected in Rexer's poll. As people start learning data mining, their first question is, "What software should I use?" You want to consider both popularity and growth rate. The Rexer poll is a very important source of this information. I hope the page can stay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bob.Muenchen (talk • contribs) 13:30, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Nov-2012: Discussion of Karl Rexer additions, MrOllie request for citation of independent sources to establish notability, and Drm310 coaching about COI

History: (I'm adding this history and link to User_talk:Krexer because I saw B.Muenchen's comment below, and realized that he and other readers may not be aware of the discussion of this page that is available at User_talk:Krexer.

• 11/2/12: Karl Rexer was surprised to find wikipedia entry about a program of survey research that Karl and his team have been conducting since 2007. Apparently it was created by someone in March 2011.
• 11/2/12: Karl added material to the page to update it and provide additional content depth. Karl is novice wikipedia author, and did not realize some wikipedia guidelines and conventions, but is trying to self educate and improve authoring.
• 11/3/12: MrOllie provided coaching to Karl about the need to improve the entry with citation of independent sources to establish notability.
• 11/4/12: Drm310 provided coaching to Karl about need for COI policy review (e.g., need for transparency).
• 11/5/12: Karl added citation of independent sources, started using TALK pages, and signing of all posts (both on his edits of this page and other pages).

A discussion of this page has been occurring at User_talk:Krexer. Any interested people should view it there.Karl (talk) 22:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

You've added a lot of new stuff, but unfortunately a lot of these citations are to blogs, press releases or other wikis - they do not meet our sourcing guidelines. You've added so much stuff that it's hard to sift out what might actually meet the guidelines. Can you list the highest quality cites here? Newspapers, peer reviewed journals, etc. - MrOllie (talk) 16:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks! I will review the sourcing guidelines, and then remove all blogs and other things that don't meet the guidelines. Good, I also thought the list was too long, but wasn't sure how wikipedia judged source quality. If you have a free minute, I'd appreciate hearing your perspective on the question I raised on Talk:SPSS. Thanks.Karl (talk) 16:55, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Removed citations that don't meet wikipedia sourcing guidelines. Most of the removed citations were to blogs and press releases. Karl (talk) 21:27, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Added a citation to the KDnuggets poll from Java Developers JournalKarl (talk) 17:54, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Notability has now been established. A number of independent sources have been added. So this page should not be deleted. I know many people who have found these data miner surveys to be a very useful resource. The many new citations help to reinforce this point. Having a wikipedia page about this survey helps provide summary-level info about the survey results and helps more people learn about this valuable resource.Dvlamis (talk) 21:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

To reduce the impact of my COI, I have removed some of the material I had previously added to this page. I want to repeat that I did not create this page. After this round of deletions, my remaining contributions are primarily:

• Adding info about the 2011 survey (when the original author created the page, the most recent survey listed was the 2010 survey).
• Addressing the notability point by adding a number of citations to independent publications.
• Identifying the 3 surveyed topics that get the most attention, and trying to relate this to other research in this area.

I am the president of the 3-person company that has conducted this research. I recognize that I have a COI about the material presented on this page. But I did not want to see the page continue to exist with outdated information about our research, so I have edited this entry. I welcome and invite other wikipedia authors to constructively edit the updated material I've added.Karl (talk) 04:20, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Due to COI, I do not want to add more material to this entry. However, if a list external citations to the Data Miner Survey is desired - here's a more complete list (cited in 13 languages). Note, only some of the citations listed there are wikipedia worthy peer reviewed journals and books; others are blogs and press releases. Karl (talk) 20:38, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Oct-2013: FYI, Some material outdated. New 2013 survey results could be mentioned on this page

I am the President of Rexer Analytics. I therefore have a COI (as I've previously discussed) and will not edit this wikipedia page. I will focus my wikipedia contributions elsewhere. However, I want to make other wikipedia contributors aware that some of the material on this wikipedia page is out of date. If other editors feel that updating this page meets the notability standards of wikipedia, I hope they will update it. Here is a list of some of possible additions to this page that could be considered:

• The survey was also conducted in 2013. The 2013 survey had 68 questions, and 1259 participants from 75 countries.
• Karl Rexer presented highlights of the 2013 Data Miner Survey results on 9/30/13 at Predictive Analytics World (PAW) Boston conference (full Boston agenda, and Abstract of Karl's plenary talk).
• Karl's PAW presentation has been written about on SearchCIO by Nicole Laskowski, Senior News Writer (Big data and predictive analytics: When is enough data enough?).
• It has also been written about by David Smith on October 15th the Revolution Analytics blog (R usage skyrocketing: Rexer poll) -- although since this is a blog, it does not meet wikipedia citation guidelines.

Right now only the Highlights of the survey results have been released. I imagine that there will be additional wikipedia-worthy news sources writing about the Full Report when it is released near the end of Oct-2013.

I want to be super open and clear that I have a COI and that I am not trying to ghost-write this wikipedia entry. This wikipedia entry was created by someone I do not know. But it describes an ongoing 7-year project that my company conducts, so I care about it. I want the wikipedia entry to be fully written by other people who care about this subject matter and have objectivity about what should and should not be included on this wikipedia page. I merely what to provide information here that other authors can consider and evaluate. Karl (talk) 21:33, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

In Dec-2013 we sent the full summary report to everyone who had requested it (over 7,000 people). It is a 41-page PDF. It is available FREE to anyone who wants it. Contact me (Karl Rexer) at krexer@RexerAnaltyics.com, if you want a copy. Several new 2013 and 2014 citations (in English, Bulgarian, Persian, and Spanish) of the Data Miner Survey have been added to our list at http://rexeranalytics.com/Data_Miner_Survey_Citations.html. Highlights of the 2013 survey are available here: http://rexeranalytics.com/Data-Miner-Survey-Results-2013.html. Video of my 2013 Boston PAW Highlights presentation is available here: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/01/prweb11535215.htm.Karl (talk)

Oct-2013: Question about the warnings at the top of this page

Do others feel it is OK to remove the warnings at the top of this page? I have a COI, so I will not make edits on this page, but if other wikipedia contributors feel it is OK to remove them, I personally think that would be good. Is this a good clean-up thing that would be good for the original person who created this page to do, if that person now feels like the "neutral POV" and "notability" guidelines have been met by the people editing this page over the last 2.5 years? I think that anyone can put these on or remove them, but I'm not sure what wikipedia conventions have arisen for how these sorts of warnings get put on or are taken off articles. Karl (talk) 21:33, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Sep-2018: Question about the warnings at the top of this page

It seems data mining is no longer a new topic in 2018. Check notability suitably in and decide. I vote for the template be removed

Iwannacrib (talk) 08:54, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

References