OEIS

[N. J. A. Sloane]

David Wilson says he thinks the quality of the database has dropped.

Let me put the record straight.  I have been spending an enormous number of hours
improving it over the past 5 years, and I think it is much better now than it ever was.

For one thing, it has increased in size by a factor of about 48 since
the 1995 book appeared, while the number of sequences has only increased by a factor
of about 10.  What this means is that there are far more references, links, formulae, 
programs, cross-references, than ever.  If it were to be published as a series
of books it would fill 48 volumes each the size of the original book.

David has been mislead by a number of recent base-dependent sequences that
had not yet received "the treatment" - which means they get corrected, extended,
edited by someone.  Eventually they all do get cleaned up. 

I enjoy these base-dependent sequences.  But of course they are not the main focus
of the database, which is and always has been sequences that arise
in scientific problems.  In math, CS, chemistry, physics, etc.
Serious sequences.  The coverage of serious sequences has continued to
grow, and there have never been any complaints about their quality.
They are the heart of the database, and the standards for them are as high
as ever.

So, David, if you have complaints about the base-dependent sequences,
send them to the person who submitted them, with a copy to me.
If you have corrections, please send them in via the usual web page.

But you are wrong about the decrease in quality.

Neil Sloane