Talk:Q336

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Autodescription[edit]

description: a type of human knowledge

Useful links
Classification of the class science (Q336) View with Reasonator View with SQID
For help about classification, see Wikidata:Classification.
parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item) 
subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
science⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1)
Miga external tool (does not work in Firefox) 
listing of subclasses, number of super and subclasses, properties of the instances: ⟨science⟩ on Miga
Browse the classes starting from this one 
Browse classes from ⟨ science ⟩ with Taxonomy Browser

Subjects are instances, not classes[edit]

We never say A is a science, right?
Please don't use subclass of (P279) or instance of (P31) to link this. You may use part of (P361) instead.
Btw, I do want to see some specified version of part of (P361).金亦天 (talk) 05:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

What is science (Q336)?[edit]

Interwiki conflict   Merge-arrows.svg
Items involved: Q8027727Talk, Q336Talk, Q475023Talk Status: X mark.svg   not resolved

some languages (de,es,pt) link a term to science (Q336) that also includes arts and humanities, but in enwiki it is en:science which does not include arts and humanities. Diskussions: de:Diskussion:Wissenschaft#Comment_on_meaning_on_other_languages en:Talk:Science#Interwiki-Links--Hokanomono (talk) 16:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Further, exact science (Q475023) seems to be the same as science (Q336).--Hokanomono (talk) 19:41, 13 December 2013 (UTC)--Hokanomono (talk) 21:24, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

There are the following distinct notions:

  • Wissenschaft/Scientia/Cienca/Nauka: includes science, humanities and philosophy
  • en:Science: includes formal sciences and natural science, but does not include humanities and philosophy.

These have to be split.

exact science (Q475023) is very close to the English science, but maybe slightly different. en:exact science is not very precise about that.

The disambiguation page Science (Q1294710) includes links to some pages with a totally different spelling. I will split them out. --Hokanomono (talk) 17:32, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done disambiguation page links--Hokanomono (talk) 21:24, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

At first I thought, that it was the best to leave en:science linked to science (Q336) and have a new item for Wissenschaft/Scientia/Cienca/Nauka, but as for example social science (Q34749) is defined as a subclass of (P279) of science (Q336), it may be better to consider en:science to be the misplaced link in science (Q336) and leave most of the others in place. Some (e.g. en:science, ja:科学) will have to be moved to a new item for the restrictive notion of science.--Hokanomono (talk) 20:29, 21 December 2013 (UTC)--Hokanomono (talk) 21:24, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

At least in those three cases, en:Science, de:Wissenschaft and pt:Ciência, the connection between them is correct (Ref.). Lauro Chieza de Carvalho (talk) 22:10, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
As a German-speaking scientist I have no doubt that the German term Wissenschaft includes theology (possibly disputed by some philosophers, but in the mainstream opinion it is Wissenschaft), history, jurisprudence, literary science, mathematics, and engineering. See also Wissenschaft is not the same as science and de:Portal:Wissenschaft. For me the open questions are: what are the other language articles about? Are the articles' subjects similar enough for an inter-wiki link to be more useful than confusing?--Hokanomono (talk) 09:03, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

See also

wiki article subject, scope
dewiki de:Wissenschaft a notion that includes science, mathematics, logic, engineering, philosophy, theology, jurisprudence and humanities. see also [1]
dewiki de:Naturwissenschaft natural science
dewiki de:Realwissenschaft empirical sciences
enwiki en:Science not clear, probably science covering natural sciences, social sciences and formal sciences. cf. en:Science (disambiguation), en:Talk:Science#Distinction from philosophy, en:Talk:Science/Archive_6#Interwiki-Links
enwiki en:Natural science natural science
lawiki la:Scientia (ratio) a notion that includes science, mathematics, logic, engineering, philosophy, humanities, jurisprudence, theology and astrology
nlwiki nl:Wetenschap generally discusses science in the English sense; section on mathematics debating whether it should be included; pure and applied science; but also mentioning in passing nl:Geesteswetenschappen which includes studies of language, history, culture, art history and theology.


User:Andreasmperu and User:Eulenspiegel1, while you're over here anyway, could I get your thoughts on this problem? w:en:Science is not the same subject as w:de:Wissenschaft – not in Wikidata terms, no matter how much each editor naturally wants their cultural viewpoint to be anointed as the One True Science™. The fact is that w:en:Science will never countenance something like art criticism as actually being a form of modern science, even though everyone ought to agree that art criticism is Wissenschaft. (The fact that these words have significantly different meanings is why philosophers who work in these areas specify the German word so often: they need to be precise.)

So on a purely factual basis, we should make Q336 either about "Science as it's commonly understood in English" or "Wissenschaft, just like the philosophers say", and split the rest of it to a different article. But if we do that, we'll end up with another "tomato" (plant vs fruit) situation, in which Wikidata is absolutely factually correct in asserting that these are technically separate subjects, but all the Wikipedias will be mad at us because their muddled interwiki links will break. (For example, I suspect that most German Wikipedians will be surprised if w:de:Wissenschaft starts correctly linking to the w:en:Wissenschaft stub, and that most English Wikipedians will be confused if there seems to be no article on "science" at the German Wikipedia.) What do you recommend? WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:45, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

We have Q336 where "Science" is defined as used in englisch. And we have Q8027727 where "Wissenschaft" is defined as used in german. The two lemma exist both and are correct integrated. The question is: Where do we integrate de:Wissenschaft? Do we put it to Q336 (the practical correct way) or do we put it to Q8027727 (the theoretical correct way)? In this case, I prefer the practical way. So put it to Q336. --Eulenspiegel1 (talk) 22:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

DDC 001[edit]

{{maintenance|DDC=001|DDCMAIN=|TREEVIA=361|TANDEM=Q901|TANDEMTREEVIA=279}}
12:25, 27 April 2014 (UTC): draft, please use the template talk page for comments;

tree might be delayed by ~15 minutes; suggested values for TREEVIA and TANDEMTREEVIA: subclass of (P279) , instance of (P31) , part of (P361) , has part (P527) , occupation (P106) , field of work (P101) , etc.
in order to see another language please change the WMFLCODE-parameter value in preview mode only
science (Q336) · purge · T · WLH · tree · reasonator · DDC: 001 · DDCTANDEM: 000 · tree using part of (P361) · TANDEM: scientist (Q901) · purge · T · WLH · tree · reasonator  · tree using subclass of (P279)