Talk:Petrel (reservoir software)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Petrel (reservoir software) is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Advert status

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The advert status will not go away until the majority of the page content describes what the software is able to accomplish, rather than how many times the software has been updated. — MaxEnt 03:34, 14 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I think tying the version number to the features introduced is a good thing. It helps map out the history of the software. I think this can be done in an unbias way.Toastar (talk) 20:48, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

No original title

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

"When it was first released the first thing that struck you was how easy and intuitive the package was to use" certainly sounds as though it was written by a SLB salesman! Having used the software when it first came out (before Technoguide sold it to Schlumberger) as well as recently, I can attest that "intuitive" is a state of mind and not a state of being. Petrel was, and remains, a highly complex software package that is, however, certainly not "intuitive." Since the statement is more opinion than fact, I feel free to edit it out. Scmrak (talk) 14:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Notability

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I have deprodded. This software is mentioned in numerous technical books, for example: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. ~Kvng (talk) 15:48, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic