sequences defined in terms of other sequences - often a good idea

[N. J. A. Sloane]

Emeric said:

4. Contributors should avoid as much as possible definitions
that include AXXXXXX. They should take the trouble to give a
self-contained definition and should mention AXXXXXX only in
the comments.

Me:  let me make the case for this.  say you are struggling
to analyze a difficult sequence.  you are searching for 
a formula, or a close match with other sequences.

very often there are many derived sequences, 
which look equally important (e.g. the sequence
of partial sums, or the binomial transform, etc.)

- and which, if you could crack any one of them would 
solve the whole problem.  in such cases the derived
sequences could well go into the OEIS along with the
main sequence.   and rather than repeat the whole definition,
%N Partial sums of AXXXXXX.
is a perfectly good definition.  I do this all the time.

If the main sequence is important, then I'm happy
to get a dozen derived sequences along with it.

Neil