Talk:Finite-difference time-___domain method: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:28, 7 June 2022

Latest revision as of 03:30, 27 July 2025

(3 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{WikiProject Physicsbanner shell|class=cC|importance=mid}}

{{WikiProject Engineering|class=cPhysics|importance=mid}}

{{WikiProject Engineering|importance=mid}}

}}

{{Ticket confirmation|license=dual|source="{{cite book|last1=Hagness|first1=Allen Taflove, Susan C.|title=Computational electrodynamics : the finite-difference time-___domain method|date=2005|publisher=Artech House|___location=Boston|isbn=1580538320|edition=3rd ed.|pages=3-4}}"|id=2012022110009998}}

Line 98 ⟶ 100:

'''Split''' I would start by splitting the list off to [[List of FDTD software]]. That seems to have worked well for [[List of numerical analysis software]] and [[List of PTP implementations]], for instance. If that's not a fully acceptable solution you can then nominate the new article for deletion and debate it there. -—[[user talk:Kvng|Kvng]] 15:18, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

* '''Split''' to [[List of finite-difference time-___domain software]] as proposed above by Kvng, keeping only ones with sourcing. (I'm uninvolved, called by RFC bot) --[[User:Cyclopia|<span style="color:green;">Cycl</span><big>o</big><span style="color:green;">pia</span>]][[User talk:Cyclopia|<fontspan colorstyle="color:red;">^talk</fontspan>]] 10:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

::For the record, RFC bot brought me here too. -—[[user talk:Kvng|Kvng]] 13:23, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Line 105 ⟶ 107:

*'''Comment'''. As EL, all the entries are already referenced to themselves, but currently, there are no ''independent'' sources discussing or comparing them. As it stands, I would be inclined to AfD such a list article were it to be created. '''[[User:Spinningspark|<span style="background:#fafad2; color:#C08000;">Spinning</span>]][[User talk:Spinningspark|<span style="color:#4840a0;">Spark</span>]]''' 21:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

::We're not speaking of cut-and-paste the list as it is; it should be referenced to third party sources etc. --[[User:Cyclopia|<span style="color:green;">Cycl</span><big>o</big><span style="color:green;">pia</span>]][[User talk:Cyclopia|<fontspan colorstyle="color:red;">^talk</fontspan>]] 11:24, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

:::Do you have a source(s) that a list could be be based on? '''[[User:Spinningspark|<span style="background:#fafad2; color:#C08000;">Spinning</span>]][[User talk:Spinningspark|<span style="color:#4840a0;">Spark</span>]]''' 11:49, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

:There are probably hundreds of lists on WP that are not collectively cited (there are three referred to in this discussion above). If you don't believe such lists should exist on WP, that's a larger issue that needs to be taken up elsewhere. -—[[user talk:Kvng|Kvng]] 17:18, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

:: The list as it stands now does not belong. A list that consists of links to articles about the packages would be ok (but if too long should be its own article). Most of the linked software would not merit its own article at present, as not being notable enough. [the result is a list that isn't really useful to anyone except the target sites.] I recommend starting a page similar to [[List of numerical analysis software]], and including one or two canonical examples as external links (say, to the largest open source projects, or to a third-party site that reviews and compares such software). <span style="padding:2px;background-color:white;color:#666;">&ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Sj|SJ]][[User Talk:Sj|<fontspan style="color:#f90;">&nbsp;+</fontspan>]]</span> 21:47, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

::: Oh, and I <3 RFC-bot, which brought me also. <span style="padding:2px;background-color:white;color:#666;">&ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Sj|SJ]][[User Talk:Sj|<fontspan style="color:#f90;">&nbsp;+</fontspan>]]</span>

::Is it not very simple to understand in accordance to [[Wikipedia:External links]] as it states "Some external links are welcome (see [[#What can normally be linked|What can normally be linked]], below), but it is [[WP:NOT#LINK|not]] Wikipedia's purpose to include a lengthy or comprehensive list of external links related to each topic." I have removed many long lists of external links from hundreds of articles. That means those must be reverted as what here is being discussed. I think '''[[User:Spinningspark|<span style="background:#fafad2;color:#C08000">Spinning</span>]]''' is in right direction.Links should be removed except few.Thanks. [[User:Justice007|Justice007]] ([[User talk:Justice007|talk]]) 17:05, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Line 119 ⟶ 121:

*'''Trim the list mercilessly'''. [[WP:NOT|Wikipedia is not web directory]]. Wikipedia lists are ususllay lists of wikipedia articles. Lists of software of unknown notability is not an option. [[User:Staszek Lem|Staszek Lem]] ([[User talk:Staszek Lem|talk]]) 17:44, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

* So... splitting didn't work, since there were too many redlinks. The list was deleted. Restoring just the major tools, in narrative form rather than as external links. <span style="padding:2px;background-color:white;color:#666;">&ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Sj|SJ]][[User Talk:Sj|<fontspan style="color:#f90;">&nbsp;+</fontspan>]]</span> 00:38, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

{{archivebottom}}

Line 158 ⟶ 160:

Reading through this article, there is too much Frederick Moxley. There are three mentions of him in the section about important historical developments in fdtd(along with people like Yee and von Neumann), and the article ends with his "suggestion" to do other things with fdtd. Compared to someone like Taflove, who appears to be a major player, Moxley appears to have a minor academic record and not many citations for fdtd work. <ref>https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=bH0FvSAAAAAJ&hl=en</ref> I suspect this is a case of self-promotion. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/128.149.87.38|128.149.87.38]] ([[User talk:128.149.87.38#top|talk]]) 09:56, 28 September 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:You're right, there have been a series of single purpose accounts who have done nothing but add mentions of Moxley on various articles, including this one. I've cleaned it up. [[User:MrOllie|MrOllie]] ([[User talk:MrOllie|talk]]) 02:33, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}}

== "Popularity" vs "advantages" ==

It seems to me that the points demonstrating the "popularity" for FDTD and the "advantages" of the method, are, for all practical purposes, the same. The method is popular because of its advantages, after all. I suggest we merge this list into just one place. [[User:אקעגן|אקעגן]] ([[User talk:אקעגן|talk]]) 03:30, 27 July 2025 (UTC)