Talk:Welcome to Citizendium/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
imported>Markus Baumeister No edit summary |
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
||
| Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
Sorry to ask, but you did read past the forth line of my proposal (past the "I'm not sure if we really want that"), didn't you? --[[User:Markus Baumeister|Markus Baumeister]] 19:09, 14 March 2007 (CDT) | Sorry to ask, but you did read past the forth line of my proposal (past the "I'm not sure if we really want that"), didn't you? --[[User:Markus Baumeister|Markus Baumeister]] 19:09, 14 March 2007 (CDT) | ||
I admit that sometimes I do read some messages rather quickly, if I have time to answer them at all. Anyway, even a human-constructed list of "top X articles" is of only limited interest and value: we actually recently ''deleted'' a whole set of such category pages (e.g., we removed all articles from [[:Category:Philosophy Workgroup (Top)]]). Anyway, of more interest to most users and contributors is something relatively specific, not generic. For both groups of people, "top philosophy articles" won't be as interesting as "outline of the history of philosophy" (for example). --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 19:46, 14 March 2007 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 19:46, 14 March 2007
Should we add some extra entry point articles to the main page? Please add your ideas below. --Larry Sanger 15:47, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
Probably we should stick to lists, overviews, and summary-type topics. Otherwise we end up making decisions about what individual topics within a field are most important--when the decision is almost always going to be completely arbitrary. That rules out the following suggestions (all of which are, obviously, extremely important topics for articles):
- Topics that are (though important) not broad enough to include: Evolution - Tectonics - Magnetic North - e and i and pi - Isaac Newton Albert Einstein - Adam Smith and Karl Marx - Montessori Teaching - Psychoanalysis - Football (soccer) and American Football :) - Natural Law
--Larry Sanger 20:43, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
- Natural Science
- Astronomy - the planets or list of planets
- Biology -
- Chemistry - the elements
- Computers - most common programming languages
- Earth Sciences
- Engineering
- Health Sciences - human body - how drugs work - human physiology
- Mathematics
- Physics - Light - Sound
- Social Sciences
- Anthropology
- Archaeology
- Economics -
- Education -
- Geography - countries of the world (or?) World Gazetteer
- Law
- Linguistics - English language - major world languages - how languages develop - origin of speech
- Politics - political ideologies or list of political ideologies
- Psychology -
- Sociology
- Humanities
- Classics - ancient Rome - ancient Greece
- History - outline of world history
- Literature - major works by language
- Philosophy - outline of the history of philosophy - Western philosophers
- Religion - world religions or list of religions or list of world religions
- Arts
- Architecture
- Music - list of musical genres (or whatever) - history of Western classical music - (or?) musical instruments
- Theater
- Visual Arts
- Applied Arts
- Agriculture - list of crops
- Business - major world corporations
- Healing Arts - alternative or complementary medicine
- Journalism - major world newspapers
- Library and Information Science
- Media
- Military - modern weaponry
How about quit trying here to find one or two additional specific lists per topic and instead add one additional generic entry per topic (maybe even as an icon) which leads to a "Most commonly looked up in XXXXX" page. This might be generated automatically from search results (using the Workgroup association as criterium where to list it), but I'm not sure if we really want that (who knows what comes out of that). Alternatively we could create that article based on our opinion what non-experts in the topic would most probably want to (or should) look at. So for Physics (where I'm non-expert) I could imagine links to Speed of Light, Fusion, Einstein, Entropy, ... on such a page. Would make the proposal process here less of a problem. --Markus Baumeister 13:58, 14 March 2007 (CDT)
One problem with the suggestion is that it is the sort of thing that CZ is set up to counteract! The Internet is full of projects that automatically aggregate popular opinion. What people are looking for in CZ is meaningful, human-created, reviewed information. Speaking for myself, I'd be much more interested in seeing a link to an outline of the history of the world than "most-searched-for history topics." --Larry Sanger 14:10, 14 March 2007 (CDT)
Sorry to ask, but you did read past the forth line of my proposal (past the "I'm not sure if we really want that"), didn't you? --Markus Baumeister 19:09, 14 March 2007 (CDT)
I admit that sometimes I do read some messages rather quickly, if I have time to answer them at all. Anyway, even a human-constructed list of "top X articles" is of only limited interest and value: we actually recently deleted a whole set of such category pages (e.g., we removed all articles from Category:Philosophy Workgroup (Top)). Anyway, of more interest to most users and contributors is something relatively specific, not generic. For both groups of people, "top philosophy articles" won't be as interesting as "outline of the history of philosophy" (for example). --Larry Sanger 19:46, 14 March 2007 (CDT)