Talk:Hysteretic model
Latest comment: 8 months ago by Largoplazo in topic Very one-sided view.
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
'
 | The contents of the Hysteretic model page were merged into Hysteresis on 2024-01-17 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
What is this article about? edit
The article tells us something that these models may have, and lists four different categories of them, but doesn't say what they are. Largoplazo (talk) 12:35, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
Very one-sided view. edit
This article, while giving off the air of being general, only cites work by the editor himself, and in the process ignoring almost a century of work on hysteresis modeling. This gives a very biased view of the field, to put it mildly, and rather feels like self-promotion by the editor. This is not how a scientist should conduct himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:D480:4C0:104C:0:0:0:100E (talk) 12:38, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
- Completely agreed. If one wants to write an article about hysteresis models, for sure some common techniques such as Preisach-Mayergoyz models should be included due to their ubiquity across numerous fields, along with I'm sure many others. CMMcCann (talk) 19:37, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
- Absolutely. I've removed the material that amounts to the author reporting his own research rather than providing a general overview of the topic. This leave us with my complaint, above, from three years ago, but so be it. And I've added a stub template. Largoplazo (talk) 20:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
- I've added a list of such models that have Wikipedia articles of their own. So now there's balance. Largoplazo (talk) 21:16, 25 August 2023 (UTC)