Talk:Calculus/Integration techniques

My goodness, it appears that the Wikipedia articles have more than wikibooks on these topics. This should not stand--Cronholm144 11:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I'm fairly new to wikibooks, and unless there's objection, I'd like to expand this page, anyone else who's currently working on, leave me a message here or on my talk page if you'd like to discuss direction/strategy. Thanks, W3asal (talk) 16:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Specifically I'd like to know how this page should relate to the Calculus/Integration page? Should it just be a summary of the equations for each technique? Thanks W3asal (talk) 17:20, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Should we justify each technique? Not a proof, but how one would develop the technique, including pictures explaining the techniques. I think these would be especially helpful for the more abstract approximations, such as the trapezoidal rule and Simpson's rule. W3asal (talk) 18:13, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Merging and other things.
I just suggested Calculus/Integration techniques/Infinite Sums and Calculus/Integration techniques/Recognizing Derivatives and the Substitution Rule be merged with Calculus/Indefinite integral since they are the already in that article and that is the proper place for them any way. I also suggested Calculus/Integration techniques/Rational Functions Using Trig and Calculus/Integration techniques/Tangent Half Angle be merged as they are the same article, one copied from the other, and then 1 example added into one. So, I feel the best name should be chosen. Then, the 1 example should be moved if necessary. Any opinions?

Also, I think this page in general is sort of pointless. These should just be sections underneath Integration techniques in the main page of Calculus. It's dumb to have a "chapter" with basically 1 main section, and that 1 main section has 10 different major subsections. It should be 1 chapter with 10 sections.

Also, any thoughts on Calculus/Integration techniques/Integration by Complexifying? No one taking basic calculus is going to know the calculus of complex variables beforehand, which they would need to know to understand what is going on in that section. That section seems more like a section that should be in a complex analysis book, not a basic calculus book. NumberTheorist (talk) 04:19, 27 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree as far as the complexifying section is concerned. I'm inclined to remove that material completely from this book and merge it into another book, but for now I'm just going to put it under the "Extensions" section of this book.  --Greenbreen (discuss • contribs) 18:02, 12 June 2011 (UTC)