Talk:Process modeling

message: ;Please sign your comments with the Wiki code ~~~~ at the end of your comments!
"Process modelling" is also a term used by chemical/process engineers to refer to their efforts to model chemical processing plants. BPM should therefore be specified fully, not shortened as in the present article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.94.6.30 (talk • contribs) 00:21, August 23, 2006
:I do not see why, the chemical processing plant is still a business, and as such the modelling of its workings fits within the business process modelling paradigm. Ansell 07:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If this is true, the article surely does not reflect any of what you said (no mention of chemicals, blast furnaces, steel making, or tempature) and only refers to how it's used in a business. Radagast83 20:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the proposed merge (of [[Business process modeling]] into [[Process modeling]]) 

message: The current article is not well written, confuses much of the concepts of Business Process Modeling into the more generic topic of process modeling, and fails to clearly define the non-business types of process modeling in a coherent manner.  The term Business Process was coined by Michael Hammer to differentiate Business Process from Manufacturing Process or Chemical Process.  
Therefore, I would suggest that the Systems project would focus only on Business Process Modeling, not process modeling in general, and that the content from this article that is specific to business process modeling be moved to the Business Process Modeling topic.  
I'm not sure that a topic on process modeling in general is going to be a particularly interesting one.  
--Nickmalik (talk) 03:37, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment - general 

message: I just read this some more after I made the next talk item. I wanted to express my ideas here first, before I got into other peoples ideas. You are suggesting here, I repeat:
# The BPM-specific content be moved to the BPM page, 
# This page should retain to process modeling in general, especially as it pertains to manufacturing and chemical processes. 
Now I agree on both suggestions and will proceed to do so sone, because nobody was agains you proposal. 
I do think this article should focuss on all process modeling in general. As you said: 
* Process modeling to manufacturing processes. 
* Process modeling to chemical processes.
And also
* Meta process modeling
* Function modelling 
* Software process modeling
And what ever other fields exist here. I think we can develop a article around this with a general intro and a section about types of process modeling. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 00:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New subsection 

message: I think this current article see here has multiple issues:
* There is a long rather undetermined introduction, which doesn't explain to what filed of science it is related, what exact mening it gives to process modelling, and what kind of process modelling, and process modeling exist
* Halfway a section starts focussing on Business Process Modelling, what seems much more detailled.
Now I noticed an older version, see here of the Business process modelling has been merged here 1 July 2007 by Radagast83. I wonder if it would be better split the both and develop both articles separately some more. --  Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 00:14, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple issues 

message: I was looking for a description to put in the disambiguation page Process, which has a link to this article. I had to look far into the article for a good description or definition. The introduction needs to be improved.
Obankston (talk) 22:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment on the Introduction