History of Science Project‑class | |||||||
|
I just added the History of Science WikiProject to the bottom of the navigation links. If it doesn't really belong there, feel free to revert. -- SteveMcCluskey 20:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I would like to update this template to a more modern look using the PhysicsNavigation template (with some modifications in colors etc.). Please see Template:Cosmology for an impression. Wishes etc. are welcome. ( Sheliak ( talk) 13:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC))
We're having a problem over at Talk:Science in the Middle Ages about how to deal with non-western cultures in the chronologically defined article on Medieval science which, according to conventional historiography, deals primarily with Medieval Western Europe. It would simplify our problem if the sidebar did not treat Science "in the Middle Ages" as the only article for that period. I suggest modifying the sidebar to retain the eras as presently defined, but add something like the cultural contexts used in the Isis Current Bibliography:
Since that would make the sidebar even longer than it is, I also suggest setting each of the sections so it could be hidden or expanded, as desired. I'm not up on coding but I presume someone can handle it.
I don't want to make a change of this magnitude without some sort of consensus. -- SteveMcCluskey ( talk) 18:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I just traced down the associated articles (or lack or them). Placing the existing articles in the History of Science sidebar might draw knowledgeable editors to improve them and it might be worthwhile to create stubs for the missing articles as points of development. -- SteveMcCluskey ( talk) 18:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Anyone object if I make this a collapsible template, and by default collapsed? William M. Connolley ( talk) 08:33, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
OK, I had a go, then reverted myself. [1] is a version in the history, if you feel like looking William M. Connolley ( talk) 21:05, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
It is a big image, and adds nothing to the template. By the way, history of science is a general subject and no image is appropriate in my opinion, so I suggest to remove it. -- Z 19:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Is sustainability a science? I am not so sure.
Is it a social science? Almost certainly not. Why is it there? Arnoutf ( talk) 19:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
The sidebox format is inconvenient in many articles, taking up much screen space, especially on the right hand side where lead images and other illustrations generally need to go. The format has been replaced in many subject areas by a navigation bar that is placed at the end of each article: this fits in well with not distracting readers, but allowing them to look further easily if they wish; it also allows articles to have several navigation templates when appropriate. I propose therefore to replace the existing sidebox with a navbar, if people are happy with that. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:29, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
History of Science Project‑class | |||||||
|
I just added the History of Science WikiProject to the bottom of the navigation links. If it doesn't really belong there, feel free to revert. -- SteveMcCluskey 20:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I would like to update this template to a more modern look using the PhysicsNavigation template (with some modifications in colors etc.). Please see Template:Cosmology for an impression. Wishes etc. are welcome. ( Sheliak ( talk) 13:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC))
We're having a problem over at Talk:Science in the Middle Ages about how to deal with non-western cultures in the chronologically defined article on Medieval science which, according to conventional historiography, deals primarily with Medieval Western Europe. It would simplify our problem if the sidebar did not treat Science "in the Middle Ages" as the only article for that period. I suggest modifying the sidebar to retain the eras as presently defined, but add something like the cultural contexts used in the Isis Current Bibliography:
Since that would make the sidebar even longer than it is, I also suggest setting each of the sections so it could be hidden or expanded, as desired. I'm not up on coding but I presume someone can handle it.
I don't want to make a change of this magnitude without some sort of consensus. -- SteveMcCluskey ( talk) 18:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I just traced down the associated articles (or lack or them). Placing the existing articles in the History of Science sidebar might draw knowledgeable editors to improve them and it might be worthwhile to create stubs for the missing articles as points of development. -- SteveMcCluskey ( talk) 18:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Anyone object if I make this a collapsible template, and by default collapsed? William M. Connolley ( talk) 08:33, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
OK, I had a go, then reverted myself. [1] is a version in the history, if you feel like looking William M. Connolley ( talk) 21:05, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
It is a big image, and adds nothing to the template. By the way, history of science is a general subject and no image is appropriate in my opinion, so I suggest to remove it. -- Z 19:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Is sustainability a science? I am not so sure.
Is it a social science? Almost certainly not. Why is it there? Arnoutf ( talk) 19:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
The sidebox format is inconvenient in many articles, taking up much screen space, especially on the right hand side where lead images and other illustrations generally need to go. The format has been replaced in many subject areas by a navigation bar that is placed at the end of each article: this fits in well with not distracting readers, but allowing them to look further easily if they wish; it also allows articles to have several navigation templates when appropriate. I propose therefore to replace the existing sidebox with a navbar, if people are happy with that. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 13:29, 9 February 2017 (UTC)