Wikipedia talk:Centralized discussion/Method Engineering Encyclopedia

Methods and methodoloy

It's a small thing, but prose irritates me that employs the word "methodology" as a lofty sounding substitute for "method." Methodology is the study of methods. The first few paragraphs overuse the word anyway. Furthermore, the introduction is unnecessarily obscure and abstract. Plain English with active verbs, please. Jive Dadson 04:27, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

I have noticed that Ruud has deleted the method engineering encyclopedia wiki. In my view this is unacceptable, because the nomination for deletion of this specific page was withdrawn in the original discussion. Furthermore, there are no conclusions yet drawn about the future of the method engineering encyclopedia wiki. As far as I am aware, the discussion is still ongoing. I would really like to receive a comment on the deletion, preferrably from Ruud. I feel like my agrumentation and the original withdrawal for deletion are totally neglected. - Jurr 23:48, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have not deleted the project itself (it is still at Wikipedia:WikiProject Method engineering) only two redirects to the project, inappropriatly placed in the main namespace. Also, at the moment these links are used (in fact, only used) to create self-references in articles. Cheers, —Ruud 00:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This does tend to underline the fact that those involved in the "method engineering" project are unfamiliar with Wikipedia, and need to familiarise themselves with our guidelines, policies, and ways of doing things before engaging in such a large-scale set of additions. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Endorse both Ruud and Mel Etitis. John Reid 02:35, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia resources for university projects

The following article in the Wikipedia namespace seem relevant to the discussion here:

I note that the method engineering project isn't listed on the Wikipedia:School and university projects page, so I'm assuming that those responsible for the project haven't seen that article before. It would probably be worthwhile for them to read over it, and to direct their students to the "instructions for students" article. --Allan McInnes (talk) 06:32, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contents of interest to specialised groups

Some of the contents here should remain, for example the interesting work on Morphological Analysis. I suggest though that the contributors limit the entries to no more than what could essentially be displayed on a single page, possibly to a link of a dedicated seperate web. I use Wikipedia to get the first order information on these types of topics and then surf on to the subject expert sites. In the case of the Morphological Analysis it highlights the important different contexts of the concept. Much of the rest can be found on the good SWEMORPH site.

BTW, my first time to edit on this site, still feeling my way so if you want to flame, ok by me, I learn quickly.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Method engineering

Hiya, everybody. Just wondering if anyone has figured out whether they think the above-named project should remain or not. I've read much of the page here, and am gibbering a little because it is almost all completely over my head, but I am compiling a list of the various project out there and want to know if the one mentioned at the top here is likely to stay or not. Thanks in advance for your response. Badbilltucker 17:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this project is pretty much dead. My recommendation is that we throw together a quick task force (maybe just me, or us) to check the articles the project created, then put it back on MFD. -- kenb215 talk 02:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it worth adding "theory focused planning" to the assumption based planning page?

Vijay Govindarajan and Chris Trimble have developed a variant of assumption based planning called "theory focused planning" www.vijaygovindarajan.com/2006/02/

I would think it's worth adding.

Philip Sutton Philip.Sutton@green-innovations.asn.au —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philip Sutton (talk • contribs) 09:49, August 24, 2007 (UTC)