Jump to content

Talk:Process performance index

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DanielPenfield (talk | contribs) at 09:34, 19 January 2014 (+WPStatistics). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconBusiness C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconStatistics C‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

This is wrong the performance index P is the reciprocal of the process capacity Index Cp. So all this stuff refers to the Cp index not the P index. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.245.118.131 (talk) 06:35, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's right. I quickly changed P to 1/P, but the article needs a rewrite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.253.196.22 (talk) 11:20, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's funny. Your definition doesn't match that given in the citations or any of the top search results (e.g., [1], [2], [3], [4], etc.). Could it be that you're pulling a prank? After all, 99% of readers won't question a nonsense edit if it looks authoritative enough! -- DanielPenfield (talk) 00:27, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]