Talk:Reynolds number
From CFD-Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
(New page: I'm a bit hesitant if we should add so many links to non-existent pages. It will only be confusing and make the text more difficult to read. A few non-existent links to really important pa...) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I'm a bit hesitant if we should add so many links to non-existent pages. It will only be confusing and make the text more difficult to read. A few non-existent links to really important pages is okay I think, but then we should start filling the non-existing links with content instead of adding more non-existent links. At least that is my opinion. Or what do you think? --[[User:Jola|Jola]] 01:21, 24 August 2007 (MDT) | I'm a bit hesitant if we should add so many links to non-existent pages. It will only be confusing and make the text more difficult to read. A few non-existent links to really important pages is okay I think, but then we should start filling the non-existing links with content instead of adding more non-existent links. At least that is my opinion. Or what do you think? --[[User:Jola|Jola]] 01:21, 24 August 2007 (MDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : I had hoped that I would not be the first to respond to this, but I agree that too many links to non-existent pages is a bad thing. Now, I think that we probably should have articles on some of these things, or at least we should be doing a better job of inter-article linking - I just set the momentum equation link to the Navier-Stokes article (which probably needs to be a link within the article rather than to the whole thing). My opinion is this: we do need more interarticle links, but we should be filling in material as we go. --[[User:Jasond|Jasond]] 15:12, 30 August 2007 (MDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 21:12, 30 August 2007
I'm a bit hesitant if we should add so many links to non-existent pages. It will only be confusing and make the text more difficult to read. A few non-existent links to really important pages is okay I think, but then we should start filling the non-existing links with content instead of adding more non-existent links. At least that is my opinion. Or what do you think? --Jola 01:21, 24 August 2007 (MDT)
- I had hoped that I would not be the first to respond to this, but I agree that too many links to non-existent pages is a bad thing. Now, I think that we probably should have articles on some of these things, or at least we should be doing a better job of inter-article linking - I just set the momentum equation link to the Navier-Stokes article (which probably needs to be a link within the article rather than to the whole thing). My opinion is this: we do need more interarticle links, but we should be filling in material as we go. --Jasond 15:12, 30 August 2007 (MDT)
