Talk:Project Neptune (water distribution system)
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled edit
Talk:Project Neptune,
it so cool i think
The two sources are unreliable as they lead to "no page found." My suggestion is to find up to date sources in order to legitimize this information about Project Neptune. The description of water distribution system is misleading as the article does not discuss any distribution system in relation to the water project. I would consider renaming the description. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fei Wade (talk • contribs) 16:21, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
The name, "Project Neptune," is misleading and needs to be more specific in order to differentiate itself from Aston Martin's luxury submarine project under the same name.
- I agree with the other person who commented on this post that it is extremely important for this page to get live links for the citations. Since there are essentially no references in this article, it makes it impossible to be reliable. I also agree that the title should be clarified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Msefami (talk • contribs) 05:17, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment edit
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Fei Wade.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Sources on the Topic edit
“Project Neptune: Improved Operation of Water Distribution Networks.” Water Distribution Systems Analysis 2008, 2009, doi:10.1061/9780784410240.
Project NEPTUNE: Real Time Anomaly Management for Water Distribution Systems.
Savic, D. A., et al. “Project Neptune: Improved Operation of Water Distribution Networks.” Water Distribution Systems Analysis 2008, 2009, doi:10.1061/41024(340)47.
More sections? edit
Maybe add more sections to make it more 'encyclopedic' and some counter arguments to make it more neutral. Pahulmeet (talk) 18:40, 27 November 2017 (UTC)