Critique

Here are some suggestions and comments that I have for your page:

provide links from the builds on topics?

did the motivation not have any source?

there is a repeat of introduction of the PC - in motivation and in overview again

maybe combine steps 2,3,4 since 3 is not always used and they are describing the same process "step 2 - form matrix Z by centering features of X and maybe even standarizing"

maybe have the eigendecomposition as another numbered step?

it is not clear from step 7 how we can limit/choose the number of the PC's to use - seems like we are projecting all of them always?

you have good flow and structure of the page and great example with the data! I thought it was easy to read and to follow, short and to the point.

The topic is relevant for the course. 5 The writing is clear and the English is good. 5 The page is written at an appropriate level for CPSC 522 students. 5 The formalism (definitions, mathematics) was well chosen to make the page easier to understand. 5 The abstract is a concise and clear summary. 5 There were appropriate (original) examples that helped make the topic clear. 5 There was appropriate use of (pseudo-) code. - (no pseudo-code but not sure if it is really needed?) It had a good coverage of representations, semantics, inference and learning (as appropriate for the topic). 4 It is correct. 5 It was too short for the topic (i.e., 1 means too long, 3 means about right) 4 It was an appropriate unit for a page (it shouldn't be split into different topics or merged with another page). 5 It links to appropriate other pages in the wiki. 4 The references and links to external pages are well chosen. 4 I would recommend this page to someone who wanted to find out about the topic. 5 This page should be highlighted as an exemplary page for others to emulate. 4 If I was grading it out of 20, I would give it: 18