Talk:Preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation

Suggested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. OlYeller^Talktome 15:53, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PROMETHEE → Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation — The article claims that the abbreviate is short for "Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation". According to WP:Article titles, "Abbreviations and acronyms are generally avoided unless the subject is almost exclusively known by its abbreviation (e.g. NATO and Laser). The abbreviation UK, for United Kingdom, is acceptable for use in disambiguation." As I don't see that the subject is known almost exclusively by its abbreviate. Obviously though, I feel that the abbreviation should be kept as a redirect to the main article. OlYeller^Talktome 18:47, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell at first glance, the subject is known mainly by its abbreviation (at least, it will be far more recognizable by the abbreviation than by the extremely long full name).--Kotniski (talk) 07:36, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per WP:ABBR. The acronym is not so well known as to remain in abreviated form. The acronym can serve as a redirect.--Labattblueboy (talk) 13:46, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Author's notes

This article will be completed soon with :

application fields about the PROMETHEE method
example of appplications
the mathematics methodology

COI

It seems likely that the three main contributors to this article have a connection with the subject or the related company D-SIGHT. Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guidelines make it clear that editors in this position should declare their interest and refrain from all but minor and uncontroversial changes to such articles. Deltahedron (talk) 15:57, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dumb TeX style

In this edit I fixed a really dumb instance of multiply nested arrays where a single use of "cases" was enough. More such cleanup is needed. This dumb way of using TeX sets a bad example for others who may learn from it. 2601:2:4D00:27B:C801:19DB:EC09:1A9B (talk) 17:16, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]