Talk:Babak Hodjat

Article tags
Dear thank you for taking your time to clean up this article. After the review from (who is one of the most professional editors around) and edits from several editors (yourself included) how relevant are the COI and advert tags? The article seems neutral and non-promotional. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 10:26, 18 March 2018 (UTC)


 * advertising I will remove, because it refers to the present state of the article, but I do not like to remove coi because it is a reflection of the entire edit history.


 * But I'm not finished editing. I have 3 problems


 * We never include all the patents in detail, and rarely include any; when we do it's only one or two key ones at most.
 * We usually include only the most influential papers; if, as is usually the case, there's no good 3rd party source for which ones they are, we use the citation figures. Researchers will sometimes prefer to list the most recent, which may be a goood PR technique in attracting grants or students, but is not encyclopedic.
 * The key claim, that he is the "Co-inventor of natural language technology that evolved into Siri is sourced to a sentence that reads "he was the primary inventor of Dejima's patented agent-oriented technology ,...,the technology behind Apple's siri. Unfortunately this is published as the author bio at the end of an article he co-wrote, ref11 . This is not independent evidence. There is also the   business periodical, which says "was one of the main inventors of the AI technology that later became the inspirational basis for Siri, "  which it ""was one of the main inventors of the AI technology that later became the inspirational basis for Siri,is sourced by them "according to his LinkedIn page. " I haven't yet figured out how to seethe German newspaper article--it doesn't recognize I've deactivated adblock-- but I expect the same.  Bothe of these are in any event highly qualified claim. The unqualified claim in the article and the infobox rely upon the headlines of the two articles--which are not under editorial control. Looking a tour article on Siri, it's clear he played a major role, but also that the importance of the various people's role is disputed. An explicit statement of this importance needs independent documentation. I'm trying to find a suitable wording.    DGG ( talk ) 04:41, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Dear


 * There could be just 1 Justia link for the patents. It is a trusted source and lists them all.
 * Newsweek article probably has the best wording “a computer scientist who played a role in Apple’s development of Siri". There is another one from Bloomberg saying “a computer scientist who helped lay the groundwork for Apple's Siri". Both are quite close to explaining his role. Even a brief look at Dejima’s patents shows that there were at least 3-4 people involved. Note that there are also certain claims made by Adam Cheyer on being the leader in development at Medium.com article, so I think that either one of them would be correct.
 * Publications are structured by date and importance. I thought about structuring them by Google scholar academic value but it shows that the most quoted works are patents. So I don’t have a clear solution for this. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:18, 19 March 2018 (UTC)