Talk:Logic simulation

NOT a mirror

Huh. I spent all this time rewriting this page trying to make it sound less essay/textbooky and more encyclopedic (even though it's poorly lacking in that aspect, and I have nothing to add), and now I wish that I had just nominated it for deletion instead.

Why? Because I found its source. Google ref # 2.

"Ohhhhhh, that's why it sounded like a textbook...."

Wikipedia is not a mirror. References are meant to be sources of information, not content. Whether or not you had permission to copy this much text, we ain't cool with having it, and I'm beginning to think this whole page ought to be a redirect. Although to what, I'm not sure...

-That ExpHP guy who never bothers to log in, 67.248.191.219 (talk) 23:27, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi! Six years ago, Wikipedia had nothing at all on logic simulation, and I had just finished editing a book that had the topic as one of the chapters. So I got permission to put the first few paragraphs up as a summary. However, over the years the article has been edited a lot, so not much remains of the original version. I'd agree it could use a re-write at this point, preferably with references to the IEEE and ACM literature. However, until then I think it still serves a useful purpose. It's not horribly wrong, it's sourced, and about 60 people read it each day. LouScheffer (talk) 02:23, 18 May 2012 (UTC)