I am still trying to figure out what format seems to work best so every page seems inconsistent. Some pages are organized by paper, some by CA post by date, some seemingly random jumbles of half topics. Once we hit on something we like best we should reformat everything to that standard, but right now there is a lot of filling out to do so I'm not worried about it too much. -JK
I'm wanting to redo the main page for MTRs and want some advice. We'd started out with links to CA posts, but those are now available on the individual proxy page. So what should be included on the main page? I'm thinking a couple of sentences about what the paper is about. If I have a chance this afternoon I'll removed the links, put it a paragraph at the top of the page and write an intro to one or two of the papers as samples.
Dave Dardinger
******************************
I agree with the idea of adding descriptions to each. It might be a good idea to briefly summarize Steve's problems/confirmations regarding the paper. For example,
"MBH98: [description].
McIntyre has showed incorrect principal components methodology, failed validation statistics, etc. See (specific page for the paper) for details."
Something like that.
