 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comment edit
This article contains some awkward grammatical constructions suggesting that English is not the author's first language or that the article has not been properly proofread.
Here are some suggested edits in square brackets.
- "It [was] founded by William Tunstall-Pedoe and [is] an answer engine [that] aims to directly answer questions posed in plain English text by drawing and reasoning from its database of discrete facts[1][2]." [It is suggested that this sentence be broken into two sentences after "Tunstall-Pedoe".]
- "The True Knowledge Answer Engine attempts [to] comprehend posed questions by disambiguating from [ the phrase "disambiguating from" is somewhat strange. It might be better to delete the word 'from' or use a word other than 'disambiguate'.] all possible meanings of the words in the question to find the most likely meaning of the question being asked."
- "“George W. Bush is [a] human being”,"
- "Unlike the others however, users who post information to True Knowledge [are] grant[ed] a "non-exclusive, irrevocable, perpetual licence to use such information to operate this website and for any other purposes.".[5]"
- "The system itself also assess[es] submitted information due the fact that the information is submitted as discrete facts that computers can understand."
136.159.208.35 (talk) 15:51, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- "George W. Bush is a president", "George W. Bush is human being", "A president is a subclass of human being"
How does him being a president and a president being a subclass of human being have to do with his birthday? According to the example, it independently knows he's a human already, so it doesn't need to derive the fact.
Notability edit
Just added a couple more external independent references. It would be good if someone could take off the "lack of notability" tag if they think it's verified enough now. Beth Holmes 1 (talk) 09:31, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
Rename edit
The new name is a bit stranger than it needs to be and i'm pretty sure the nearest comparison (Siri) is Siri (software) and so i don't think this would be a controversial move. Thanks Jenova20 09:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
- I didn't have any major objections about moving the page. I do have an issue, however, with the way you unilaterally performed the move without waiting for feedback to your comment. When I first moved the page, it was uncontroversial because the company had changed its name, but someone could arguably disagree with the move you proposed above: for instance, Evi is not only the app (used to be, now the whole company and its products are called that); the website existed before, and is probably closer to Wolfram Alpha than to Siri. Please be a little more patient next time. --Waldir talk 11:54, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
- I didn't think it was controversial. As it stands there's little about the company other than their main product, which is a piece of software named Evi. I was planning on creating this article and researched it quite a bit (as can be seen below) and so the merge makes more sense name-wise.
- I'll wait for a reply next time though Waldir. Thank you Jenova20 12:00, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
- Controversial might be too strong a word, but the lead of the article says: "Its first product was an answer engine that aimed to directly answer questions posed in plain English text, which is accomplished using a database of discrete facts." -- I haven't done a lot of research on this, but it seems to me that Evi is somewhat of a wrapper (voice recongition/mobile app form?) around the core answer engine. But anyway, I didn't mean to argue this particular point, just the harshness of the move. I'm glad you agree that it's desirable to gather feedback from others (in fact, performing the move kinda defeated the purpose of proposing it on the talk page in the firt place). Cheers, Waldir talk 14:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
- Basically she's like Siri, you ask her a question and 90% of the time she gives the right answer back, the rest of the time she suggests you ask her something else. If you want to learn more then i've added a section below to eventually be merged with this as i was planning an article on her myself a while back.
- I appreciate your feedback and i'm glad that because of you something has been taken off my "to-do" list, i'm in your debt Waldir, Thank you Jenova20 15:43, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
- Controversial might be too strong a word, but the lead of the article says: "Its first product was an answer engine that aimed to directly answer questions posed in plain English text, which is accomplished using a database of discrete facts." -- I haven't done a lot of research on this, but it seems to me that Evi is somewhat of a wrapper (voice recongition/mobile app form?) around the core answer engine. But anyway, I didn't mean to argue this particular point, just the harshness of the move. I'm glad you agree that it's desirable to gather feedback from others (in fact, performing the move kinda defeated the purpose of proposing it on the talk page in the firt place). Cheers, Waldir talk 14:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Previous work edit
I hereby disown this work in private space for anyone who wants to use it in this article. User:Jenova20/Evi (software) It covers the basics. Thanks Jenova20 10:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Update needed edit
I've tagged the article for needing an update. Apart from the lead's mention of a late-2012 acquisition, the page describes True Knowledge circa 2010 in the present tense with a mention of the Evi app circa summer 2012, without mentioning, for example, its discontinuation. Since I have a conflict of interest as a former employee in all three incarnations (TK, Evi, Amazon) I won't make changes to the article myself, but thought it was worth flagging this as needing some more recent attention. › Mortee talk 01:13, 24 August 2019 (UTC)