User talk:Compsim

Welcome!
Hello, Compsim, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Do you have a conflict of interest which you would like to mention? IRWolfie- (talk) 23:10, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

I am not aware of a conflict of interest, what are you referring to? Or is this more a general comment which applies to all contributors?--Compsim (talk) 23:22, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No sorry, you made some additions of a book to two molecular related articles which didn't seem to be that on topic, so I thought I would ask. IRWolfie- (talk) 23:25, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

The book is indeed not especially for Molecular Simulations (doing/using) but for planing/writing (in C/C++) all kinds of scientific simulation programs (in particular when using advanced data structures/algorithms) and doing data analysis. So for those who program simulations themselves (of any type, also molecular), it is relevant, I guess. For those who used ready-to-go programs, it is not so relevant (similar as the Rapaport or the Allen/Tildesly books which are somehow also intended for those who write simulations on their own)--Compsim (talk) 23:38, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ah ok, it's common practice to only add material to references which is directly related to article content. I would suggest an article dedicated to simulation would be more suitable where it can be used to verify article content. Some articles have further reading sections for books which discuss article content in more detail. See Further_reading. IRWolfie- (talk) 23:45, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

I see, indeed "further reading" should be somehow directly on the topic.--Compsim (talk) 23:57, 3 May 2012 (UTC)