Difference between revisions of "Talk:Case Studies"
Jwdietrich (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
Exactly the references are the reason why this page is not merged with marketing case studies. Those are related to commercial projects, while this page is devoted to free and scientific software. | Exactly the references are the reason why this page is not merged with marketing case studies. Those are related to commercial projects, while this page is devoted to free and scientific software. | ||
--[[User:Jwdietrich|Jwdietrich]] 13:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC) | --[[User:Jwdietrich|Jwdietrich]] 13:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Well okay, but that does not address my concerns about why those reference are there in the first place... | ||
| + | --[[User:BigChimp|BigChimp]] 14:22, 3 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 16:22, 3 April 2013
Too many references?
Nice article (and great example of use of Laz/FPC), but it seems the references belong more to an academic article than a marketing case study unless they clearly indicated how spinathyr/simthyr are used. Even then, perhaps a selection of a couple of them might be better?
Otherwise this may look too much like a boring article and scare away would be users...
Thanks, --BigChimp 06:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Why not merge with marketing case studies
Also, I don't really see the relevance of dividing case studies into commercial and non-commercial. Both serve the purpose of providing examples where Laz/FPC use was an improvement.
Thanks, --BigChimp 06:46, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
References
Exactly the references are the reason why this page is not merged with marketing case studies. Those are related to commercial projects, while this page is devoted to free and scientific software. --Jwdietrich 13:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Well okay, but that does not address my concerns about why those reference are there in the first place... --BigChimp 14:22, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
