Talk:List of atmospheric radiative transfer codes

message: I went through step-by-step and removed all of the codes which did not have wikipedia articles.  PER THE ABOVE.  If there is not a wikipedia article about it, it shouldnt be in the list in the first place.  It is not my job to write the article.  Just because someone makes a change to HITRAN and renames it doesnt mean it deserves an aritcle and place on tbhis list.  Also, the extremely LONG list of papers at the end was just ridiculous.  This is not a journal site with every radiative transfer code paper listed.  Try to follow wikipedia rules people. --Chuck Sirloin (talk) 04:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of excess codes 

message: Maybe someone could add ARTS. I can't, due to WP:COI. But I believe it deserves to be there. --Gerrit CUTEDH 15:37, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ARTS 

message: I spent a ton of time cleaning it up and 3 months later someone blindly reverts all that work.  Fair warning: any codes without enough notability to have wikipedia articles or notable secondary sources cited will be deleted.  Get crackin all you code submitters. -Chuck Sirloin (talk) 04:20, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not having a wikipedia article is NOT a good criteria for inclusion. On the contrary, many lists are created just for this purpose: to include info lesser important codes/topics which are not notable enough to have an own article. Even so, many very important codes are missing now, which do deserve an own article; i am thinking of I3RC; SHDOM (not the PP version), SHARM 1-D and 3-D. They can be included with a red link, as an incentive for someone to create the article. Voorlandt (talk) 13:41, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I believe that the International TOVS Working Group (ITWG) sub group for Radiative Transfer and Surface Property Models (RTSP) website  has a rather long list of radiative transfer models, and descriptions of each model. --Grce (talk) 21:11, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This list is ridiculous 

message: This article requires a cleanup, as has been noted before, and I am willing to put some time into it. I should mention that I do have a conflict of interest, as I am part of a group that is very active in the development of the  Atmospheric Radiative Transfer Simulator (ARTS), but I guess most people with an interest in this subject have an interest in at least one of those radiative transfer codes, but together we can still make the article better; and objectively, I think a list of radiative transfer codes should include ARTS, because ARTS is a radiative transfer code. If we work together, we can limit those conflicts of interest some of us may have. Some problems with the article include:
* The categorisation is not very useful. A code may be line-by-line AND multiple-scattering AND consider polarisation. One or more tables along the lines of all the Comparison of... articles may be more useful.
* The conditions as lined out by User:Pflatau are not good conditions for inclusion.
* The article contains incorrect information. Not all codes listed are public. Nor do they have to be, but the article claims they do.
I'm sure that together we can come to more improvements we can do. Let's get started. --Gerrit CUTEDH 09:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have been bold and significantly changed the article. Please improve, comment, criticise, etc. --Gerrit CUTEDH 14:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup plans 

message: I have merged List of atmospheric radiative transfer codes with Atmospheric radiative transfer codes, so the discussion is best continued at Talk:Atmospheric radiative transfer codes. --Gerrit CUTEDH 10:18, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged