Difference between revisions of "Talk:Robocode/Articles"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Not exactly about Robocode: reply) |
|||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
I ran across another paper that uses [[Robocode]] in its study but isn't strictly about Robocode. Is [http://www.cis.uab.edu/info/OOPSLA-DSVL2/Papers/Korhonen.pdf] the sort of thing we want to include? -- [[User:Kuuran|Kuuran]] 06:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC) | I ran across another paper that uses [[Robocode]] in its study but isn't strictly about Robocode. Is [http://www.cis.uab.edu/info/OOPSLA-DSVL2/Papers/Korhonen.pdf] the sort of thing we want to include? -- [[User:Kuuran|Kuuran]] 06:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Please use the edit button at the top when you are starting new section. I don't think this is considered as a Robocode's article, since I believe that many papers, especially one on machine learning, do use Robocode's as its testing framework. --[[User:Nat|<span style="color:#099;">Nat</span>]] [[User talk:Nat|<span style="color:#0a5;">Pavasant</span>]] 07:47, 7 October 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 09:47, 7 October 2009
Move to Robocode/Articles
I'm thinking that this page should be moved to Robocode/Articles, but I'm not sure. Opinions? --AaronR 23:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- It also occurred to me that maybe this should be "List of articles about Robocode", the way Wikipedia uses that naming convention. I don't know if I have a strong opinion on any of the titles, though... --Voidious 00:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- I like that name better, since this isn't really part of the official Robocode documentation. --AaronR 00:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Alright, I moved it. The old page needs to be deleted. --AaronR 00:25, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- The intension of the page is to gather all relevant external documentaion about Robocode, but also e.g. RoboLeague, RoboRumble and other stuff. This way we have one page for it all. :) --Fnl 12:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Not exactly about Robocode
I ran across another paper that uses Robocode in its study but isn't strictly about Robocode. Is [1] the sort of thing we want to include? -- Kuuran 06:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Please use the edit button at the top when you are starting new section. I don't think this is considered as a Robocode's article, since I believe that many papers, especially one on machine learning, do use Robocode's as its testing framework. --Nat Pavasant 07:47, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
