Talk:Q50675
Autodescription — historiography (Q50675)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “historiography” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
historiography⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
regarding historiography (Q50675) and science-of-history (Q1066186)[edit]
Hi, I made some decisions between the two, particularly settling for the Chinese and Japanese articles. I have elaborated this issue at w:Talk:Historiography (newest section) on enwiki. Please take a look.
If anyone wants to modify this, please notify me by leaving msg on my Talk page. Thank you! -- SzMithrandir (talk) 01:47, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Double Items?[edit]
Q30277550. Liadmalone (talk) 01:02, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
- The term "historiography" is a bit ambiguous. While this item covers the term in its ambiguity, historiography (Q30277550) focusses on historical writing (in difference to the history of historical writing) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:26, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Why all these edits ?[edit]
Hi @Valentina.Anitnelav:, historiography (Q50675) is the study of historical methods (a discipline), while a historiography (Q30277550) is an historical writing (a genre). I don't understand some of your edits, they kind of remix what have already been disentangled. For example, the point "a" in the description is already what historiography (Q30277550) is for, and therefore, the replacement of academic discipline (Q11862829) by umbrella term (Q210588) does not seem to suit. CaLéValab (talk) 16:28, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- @CaLéValab: Apparently what seems to be disentangling to one person seems to be entangling to the other. I did quite some disentangling some years ago (in 2017) and recently the three related items are getting entangled (from my point of view), again. There is this item for the general, ambiguous idea of historiography (see the first sentence of the English article), then there is historiography (Q30277550) for historical writing and history of historiography (Q2699662) for the historical discipline. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 16:41, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, I get the logic, thanks. CaLéValab (talk) 17:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)