Talk:OPTICS algorithm: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
criticism of explanation |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
: Done: DOI given by Springer was for the whole book, not just the chapter. Manual "cite book" now. --[[User:Chire2|Chire2]] ([[User talk:Chire2|talk]]) 11:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC) |
: Done: DOI given by Springer was for the whole book, not just the chapter. Manual "cite book" now. --[[User:Chire2|Chire2]] ([[User talk:Chire2|talk]]) 11:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
== Is there anybody who could understand the essence of algorithm with help of explanation given in this article?== |
== Is there anybody who could understand the essence of the algorithm with help of the explanation given in this article?== |
||
[[Special:Contributions/37.110.18.166|37.110.18.166]] ([[User talk:37.110.18.166|talk]]) 17:48, 10 March 2014 (UTC) |
[[Special:Contributions/37.110.18.166|37.110.18.166]] ([[User talk:37.110.18.166|talk]]) 17:48, 10 March 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:48, 10 March 2014
![]() | Statistics Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
|
Reference to broken DOI
A reference was recently added to this article using the Cite DOI template. The citation bot tried to expand the citation, but could not access the specified DOI. Please check that the DOI doi:10.1007/b72280 has been correctly entered. If the DOI is correct, it is possible that it has not yet been entered into the CrossRef database. Please complete the reference by hand here. The script that left this message was unable to track down the user who added the citation; it may be prudent to alert them to this message. Thanks, Citation bot 2 (talk) 11:36, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done: DOI given by Springer was for the whole book, not just the chapter. Manual "cite book" now. --Chire2 (talk) 11:47, 4 May 2010 (UTC)