This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Geology Low‑importance Talk:Multiple-indicator Kriging is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Statistics Low‑importance This redirect 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.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics articles Low This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

This article makes no attempt to say what multiple indicator kriging is. That should be added. Michael-- Hardy 20:00, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed much of the body text as it is based on a unreferenced opinion and many elements are factually incorrect. Will try to update in the future with a description of the method. --Lexeconicon (talk) 13:27, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple indicator kriging is not new. A quick google search found Elsevier articles 12 years old using it. As someone that has studied and works with kriging, indicator kriging and geostatistics, I have to say that indicator kriging and multiple indicator kriging methods violate one of the requirements of kriging which is a Gaussian distribution of the data. A data in the form of 0-1 or 0,1,2,3 can't have a Gaussian distribution. Hence, kriging accuracy suffers. As such, uncited remarks of "a new method that could more accurately estimate overall global mineral deposit concentrations or grades" seem inaccurate to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Apavlides24 (talk • contribs) 11:53, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The content of this article can be merged into a section of Kriging. Thoughts? +mt 03:40, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As it stands, there is not enough content to make it worthwhile as a separate article. MUST have a description of MIK to be worth keeping. ChrisPer (talk) 01:08, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A reference or two would also be good. One good discussion - first stop - Isaaks, Edward H. & Srivastava,R. Mohan, 1989. An Introduction to Applied Geostatistics, Oxford University Press,pp.417-445. ChrisPer (talk) 01:10, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]