Redirected from Talk:Wikipedia arranged by topic
|
By contrast, on the Wikipedia arranged by topic, we will have listed such general subjects as beauty (philosophy) and landform (geology). So, rather than just sticking with Philosophy, we will have being, goodness, knowledge, and a number of other basic topics studied by philosophy.
Sometimes, people want to go straight to the content.
Sometimes, we (educated human beings) have trouble understanding what a topic is even about, and instead of reading about a discipline (i.e., a practice of studying a subject), we would rather read about the subjects that the discipline studies. If I'm a high school student, I might, for example, look at "physics" and have no idea of what physics is, and be turned off to the whole idea of clicking on physics. But if I look at mass, motion, relativity, etc., I might be more inclined to click through to one of those topics, and find out more about physics.
Human thought nearly always benefits from having vivid, clear examples. So this is a way of giving vivid, clear examples of what each subject studies.
Here are a few rules for selecting subjects (which I, Larry Sanger, hereby decree we follow, by the power vested in me as creator of this page :-) ):
One interesting consideration about this idea is that, as in the case of philosophy, very many (perhaps all) disciplines cannot really be regarded as the study of just one thing--i.e., probably, for no discipline there is no one general category, C, such that the subject studied by that discipline is accurate and exhaustively described as 'the study of C'. Therefore, Wikipedia arranged by topic would have to include many more entry points than the present HomePage does, in order to be (more or less directly) connected to the same material that the top-level discipline articles connect to.
This consideration was inspired in part by an article Nupedia's Zoology editor wrote about Zoology. I replied that it seemed to be a really wonderful article about animals, and that we ought to rename the article "Animal." She agreed. A different article, about the study of animals, will be written about Zoology. This then raised the question as to what the top-level article should be for Nupedia: "Animal" or "Zoology" (or even "Animalia")?
Of course, the issue arises here on Wikipedia as well.
It's a great idea to arrange articles by topic rather than by discipline, since people don't always know what discipline their topic falls under, ... so why don't you do it?? The names of the categories on this page are disciplines, not topics. I suggest that the categories should be changed from abstract nouns to concrete nouns. (I can't think of all the categories myself, but these are examples.)
Natural Sciences --> The Natural World
I know that some of these categories sound childish, but maybe they should be, so that people who are not familiar with the field can understand them at a glance.
Also, be aware that not all disciplines will have a general topic that includes all the same articles, and vice-versa. But that's a good thing. That's the advantage of choosing to browse a hierarchy of topics or a hierarchy of disciplines. Some Wikipedia articles will show up more prominently in one listing than the other. So, the first step should be to invent a list of top level topics (i.e. objects and concepts that are studied).
As your example shows, an arrangement by topic can easily be (and probably should be) isomorphic to an arrangement by discipline. Britannica's Propaedia offers an interesting arrangement named by topic. I offer an arrangement named by discipline in Human Knowledge: Foundations and Limits. -- Brian Holtz
Search Encyclopedia
|
Featured Article
|