Talk:Cuckoo search
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 15 July 2016. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. |
Deleted content
editA large amount of content and references was removed with this edit. Diego (talk) 20:16, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Criticism
editI have removed the boilerplate criticism section that appeared in the lede of this article (and in many others), which appears in more or less the same form at List of metaphor-based metaheuristics. Since I have made similar removals or replacements on other pages, if anyone has an issue with this one, it's best to start an omnibus discussion at Talk:List of metaphor-based metaheuristics. —Psychonaut (talk) 19:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Merit of the algorithm
editIt is not clear from the article if the proposed algorithm is better than or any different from random search. Most of the article is dedicated to selling the Cuckoo metaphor to an unsuspecting reader. I dare to suggest that high citation counts of this and other Xin-She Yang's works are due to their catchy marketing ("firefly", "flower pollination", "bat" and other algorithms) rather than their meaningful content. The article should be deleted if I am right to think this way, and rewritten otherwise. AVM2019 (talk) 16:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC)