This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comparison of CAD editors for computer-aided engineering was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 14 August 2010 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Comparison of computer-aided design software. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Recently some criteria for inclusion af a program in the article were added by User:DuLithgow. As I disagree with some criteria I would like to discuss them here. These are the new criteria for inclusion of an application:
I'm fine with the firt two requirements, but I don't see why we should have the other two:
Although lack of updates may indicate that some software is becoming less relevant it may still be more relevant than other programs in the list. I think the removal should be decided case by case if an application is not receiving updates anymore.
I think we should try to include all programs that are notable, no matter if they have their seperate Wikipedia page. Otherwise a fair comparison will not be possible because the inclusion of a program depends on whether there is a Wikipedian who is motivated to create a page about that subject.
What do you think? -- Marko Knoebl ( talk) 16:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Why is any mention regarding Intergraph missing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.203.94.155 ( talk) 12:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
SketchUp is listed on the other 3d applications page as having as its primary use "Computer Aided Design". Is there some reason it's excluded here? Hammerquill ( talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Chief Architect has a DIY - Enthusiast product that is in a very different price category, $59 - $495. [ [5]] The question I propose is should this be added, should it have it's own row, should it be added onto Chief's row? I think the third option would make for a very tall row as it has 4 of it's own versions. Preston A. Vickrey (humbly) ( talk) 12:17, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
This Talk page needs a drastic clean-up if it is going to follow the conventions across the rest of WP. In particular, almost the entire set of discussions shown currently is from circa 2012, and should be shifted to an Archive. This will clear the way of meaningful discussion of the present article. It will also reduce/remove the potential for new comments to be added into the so-called Old discussions archive (as has already happened). —DIV ( 49.186.109.103 ( talk) 13:20, 13 July 2023 (UTC))
—DIV ( 49.186.109.103 ( talk) 13:29, 13 July 2023 (UTC))
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comparison of CAD editors for computer-aided engineering was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 14 August 2010 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Comparison of computer-aided design software. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Recently some criteria for inclusion af a program in the article were added by User:DuLithgow. As I disagree with some criteria I would like to discuss them here. These are the new criteria for inclusion of an application:
I'm fine with the firt two requirements, but I don't see why we should have the other two:
Although lack of updates may indicate that some software is becoming less relevant it may still be more relevant than other programs in the list. I think the removal should be decided case by case if an application is not receiving updates anymore.
I think we should try to include all programs that are notable, no matter if they have their seperate Wikipedia page. Otherwise a fair comparison will not be possible because the inclusion of a program depends on whether there is a Wikipedian who is motivated to create a page about that subject.
What do you think? -- Marko Knoebl ( talk) 16:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Why is any mention regarding Intergraph missing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.203.94.155 ( talk) 12:52, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
SketchUp is listed on the other 3d applications page as having as its primary use "Computer Aided Design". Is there some reason it's excluded here? Hammerquill ( talk) 18:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Chief Architect has a DIY - Enthusiast product that is in a very different price category, $59 - $495. [ [5]] The question I propose is should this be added, should it have it's own row, should it be added onto Chief's row? I think the third option would make for a very tall row as it has 4 of it's own versions. Preston A. Vickrey (humbly) ( talk) 12:17, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
This Talk page needs a drastic clean-up if it is going to follow the conventions across the rest of WP. In particular, almost the entire set of discussions shown currently is from circa 2012, and should be shifted to an Archive. This will clear the way of meaningful discussion of the present article. It will also reduce/remove the potential for new comments to be added into the so-called Old discussions archive (as has already happened). —DIV ( 49.186.109.103 ( talk) 13:20, 13 July 2023 (UTC))
—DIV ( 49.186.109.103 ( talk) 13:29, 13 July 2023 (UTC))