Talk:Flomerics FAQ
From CFD-Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
:I'm sorry if you are feeling targeted (that was not the intent) - but I don't see what you are talking about. Have other vendors posted advertising? Yes. Have we done our best to keep that from happening? Yes. There is an ongoing discussion about guidelines/rules for the posting of code information (see [[Talk:Codes]] and the forum discussion that begins [http://www.cfd-online.com/Forum/wiki.cgi?read=568 here]). I am not 100% happy with all the info that is currently posted, but this is not my personal wiki, and given the collaborative nature of a wiki, compromise is important. In that spirit, I suggest that you get rid of the question and answer formating, condense what you have (a lot), and post it as a "Flowmerics" page that is linked off of the [[Codes]] page. A significant portion of my objection to what you posted was the Q&A format. --[[User:Jasond|Jasond]] 10:36, 8 June 2007 (MDT) | :I'm sorry if you are feeling targeted (that was not the intent) - but I don't see what you are talking about. Have other vendors posted advertising? Yes. Have we done our best to keep that from happening? Yes. There is an ongoing discussion about guidelines/rules for the posting of code information (see [[Talk:Codes]] and the forum discussion that begins [http://www.cfd-online.com/Forum/wiki.cgi?read=568 here]). I am not 100% happy with all the info that is currently posted, but this is not my personal wiki, and given the collaborative nature of a wiki, compromise is important. In that spirit, I suggest that you get rid of the question and answer formating, condense what you have (a lot), and post it as a "Flowmerics" page that is linked off of the [[Codes]] page. A significant portion of my objection to what you posted was the Q&A format. --[[User:Jasond|Jasond]] 10:36, 8 June 2007 (MDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I followed the format of other vendors. FAQ, doesn't that mean Frequently Asked Questions? It invites Q&A format. I'll do what I can to make it completely different than anyone else. Also, why was the addition of "Flomercs" removed from the subhead under FAQ? Certainly that can't be considered objectionable. Sharon | ||
Revision as of 13:29, 11 June 2007
This looks more like advertising than real FAQ's. CFD-Wiki is not the place to advertise your products and people who are writing about codes or products sold by their employer should be very careful to write in an objective way without any bias. --Jola 14:04, 6 June 2007 (MDT)
- In my opinion, these questions and answers do not belong in the wiki. These question and answers are not on the use of the code, and I think we should reserve the FAQ's for usage-type questions. --Jasond 14:57, 6 June 2007 (MDT)
- Yes, I agree. It is too close to advertising and thereby directly breaks the CFD-Wiki policies. I will remove these questions and answers from this FAQ. I hope Sharon will understand. --Jola 03:39, 7 June 2007 (MDT)
If that's the case then I suggest that you take a look at the other vendors who have also posted similar information. I made sure that there were no true advertising type content placed. - Sharon
- I'm sorry if you are feeling targeted (that was not the intent) - but I don't see what you are talking about. Have other vendors posted advertising? Yes. Have we done our best to keep that from happening? Yes. There is an ongoing discussion about guidelines/rules for the posting of code information (see Talk:Codes and the forum discussion that begins here). I am not 100% happy with all the info that is currently posted, but this is not my personal wiki, and given the collaborative nature of a wiki, compromise is important. In that spirit, I suggest that you get rid of the question and answer formating, condense what you have (a lot), and post it as a "Flowmerics" page that is linked off of the Codes page. A significant portion of my objection to what you posted was the Q&A format. --Jasond 10:36, 8 June 2007 (MDT)
I followed the format of other vendors. FAQ, doesn't that mean Frequently Asked Questions? It invites Q&A format. I'll do what I can to make it completely different than anyone else. Also, why was the addition of "Flomercs" removed from the subhead under FAQ? Certainly that can't be considered objectionable. Sharon
