Talk:Upwind differencing scheme for convection: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 2Paule - "→Single source?: new section" |
Tag: |
||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start| |
|||
{{WikiProject Physics |importance=Low}} |
|||
}} |
|||
The title of this page is wrong. |
The title of this page is wrong. |
||
It should be "Upwind differencing scheme for advection" "convection" is something different |
It should be "Upwind differencing scheme for advection" "convection" is something different |
||
== Single source? == |
== Single source? Transportiveness?== |
||
Any more sources? Is this actually used? <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:2Paule|2Paule]] ([[User talk:2Paule|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/2Paule|contribs]]) 18:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Any more sources? Is this actually used? What is Transportiveness? This whole entry is dubious and badly written. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:2Paule|2Paule]] ([[User talk:2Paule|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/2Paule|contribs]]) 18:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
== Needs revision or should be removed == |
|||
This page is not useful. The discussion is limited to a very specific low-order scheme applied to a particular form of the convection-diffusion equation. It is based on a single source. I would recommend abandoning/removing this and broadening the discussion presented in the 'Upwind scheme' page (which I have not contributed to) where a proper treatment can be found. [[User:Jcandy|Jcandy]] ([[User talk:Jcandy|talk]]) 07:30, 18 January 2017 (UTC) |
|||
== Should be removed and merged with the Upwind scheme page == |
|||
This article is poorly written and cites about 15 pages of a single textbook. While this differencing scheme might be useful in some fields it should fall under the larger 'Upwind scheme' page. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/207.151.223.182|207.151.223.182]] ([[User talk:207.151.223.182#top|talk]]) 16:40, 23 June 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
Latest revision as of 13:14, 24 January 2024
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
The title of this page is wrong.
It should be "Upwind differencing scheme for advection" "convection" is something different
Single source? Transportiveness?
[edit]Any more sources? Is this actually used? What is Transportiveness? This whole entry is dubious and badly written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2Paule (talk • contribs) 18:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Needs revision or should be removed
[edit]This page is not useful. The discussion is limited to a very specific low-order scheme applied to a particular form of the convection-diffusion equation. It is based on a single source. I would recommend abandoning/removing this and broadening the discussion presented in the 'Upwind scheme' page (which I have not contributed to) where a proper treatment can be found. Jcandy (talk) 07:30, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Should be removed and merged with the Upwind scheme page
[edit]This article is poorly written and cites about 15 pages of a single textbook. While this differencing scheme might be useful in some fields it should fall under the larger 'Upwind scheme' page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.151.223.182 (talk) 16:40, 23 June 2022 (UTC)