Talk:Examples of generating functions

Worked Examples?

Wouldn't wikibooks be a more appropriate place for "worked examples"? Wikipedia is not a textbook. --345Kai (talk) 23:37, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think Wikipedia is an appropriate place for worked examples; worked examples are just another way of presenting information. NefariousPhD (talk) 03:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page is rather unfortunately written in textbook style. Not suitable at all for looking up information. What's wrong with writing a wiki book on generating functions and linking it from wikipedia? That's the proper way to do this. In wikipedia it would be more useful to present the facts without all the tedium of derivations that bore half the audience and lose the other half.--345Kai (talk) 07:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this an effective worked example?

I teach mathematics at a university and find this page so dense with mathematical jargon that it defeats its stated purpose of providing another means for people to understand the concept. Generating functions is not a difficult concept. I would advise the authors to stop trying so hard to be precise, and provide some examples so that readers can get the gist of the concept first.

The authors' should follow their own link to "Worked-example effect" topic, which states, "it is important that worked examples be structured effectively, so that extraneous cognitive load does not impact learners"; this topic has far too much 'extraneous cognitive load' to be effective as a worked example. NefariousPhD (talk) 03:13, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting some examples

As the above poster states, some of the examples are too dense to serve as instructional material. Moreover, the examples make very esoteric use of generating function techniques and may not be appropriate for someone who is looking to find information about classic techniques. I rate these examples as follows: A 10/10 B 8/10 C 7/10 D 7/10 E 7/10 F 2/10. Let me know which of these should be deleted. -Zahlentheorie (talk) 13:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]