Talk:Earth science

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition The study of the components and processes of the planet Earth. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Earth Sciences [Categories OK]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant Not specified

I'm nigh certain that not all hydrology is salt-water hydrology. Is there a reason it was filed under oceanography? --Aguido Horatio Davis 06:49, 11 April 2007 (CDT)

A number of sources suggest that it is. It is not written in stone though, Should we make it a separate discipline or a subdiscipline of another discipline? The work is in progress, which is true of all these article. Let me know what we need to do with it. Thomas Simmons 13:42, 12 April, 2007 (EPT)

Future development

At some point, as the articles for the subcategories are written, the myriad subdivisions should be relegated to internal links to those articles and the subject herein developed more along the lines of the Biology article. At this point, however, this article serves as an introduction and outline to the subject to let the reader know what the topic basically encompasses and authors will be able to develop a cohesive collection of related articles from a coherent outline. Thomas Simmons 15:32, 12 April, 2007 (EPT)

I suggest the chapter "Disciplines and sub-disciplines" should be reduced to a list of links quite soon. Viable text for single disciplines could be already moved to the relative articles (e.g. we can start the article "Sedimentary Geology" and use the text posted in Earth Sciences as a stub for the new article). Most terms of the lists will appear as red links of course.

Two sections or chapters instead I believe should be here: one giving a hint to the greater theories of Earth sciences (e.g., plate tectonics), the other about major challenges and currently debated problems (e.g., global warming). The purpose is to give the reader an idea of what Earth Sciences is about, extensive explanations of those hot topics may later have their own articles.

Other ideas? --Nereo Preto 09:13, 14 April 2007 (CDT)

I created Sedimentary geology and copied the relative text in the new article, with a few changes. Take a look, I believe it's the right thing to do.

--Nereo Preto 09:30, 14 April 2007 (CDT)

I moved the sub-disciplines of Geology into a table. I believe the same should be done for all major divisions of Earth Sciences, it seems to me the article becomes much more readable. I am uncertain about the many lines of text that already existed under some subdisciplines - maybe they should become stubs, though this might be against CZ "best practices"? Those lines of text are still there for now, though. --Nereo Preto 15:04, 1 May 2007 (CDT)

They could become stubs but for now the objective is to provide a brief overview of the topic as both index and catalogue of related fieilds.. At some point my contributions will run over and the stub will then be put up. Might do some now. --Thomas Simmons 21:25, 1 May 2007 (CDT) +17 hours


This insert: "There's a question about whether the modern period of global warming is mostly naturally caused or mostly man-made. See anthropogenic global warming theory."

Is a bit off in that its more of a fragment of a longer piece and dangles detached as it is here, --not coherent or cohesive in the given text, that is.

The insert would read something like, at this stage:

"Climatologist are currently concerned with major aspects of climate change resulting from global warming. (see global warming and anthropogenic global warming theory. "--Thomas Simmons 20:18, 10 May 2007 (CDT)

Wiki formatting

Please don't mess with the wikiformatting of this article too much. In particular:

  • don't use headings with only 1 equals sign on either side; they create a heading at article-title level.
  • don't bold items within headings; they're already going to be emphasised.

Making changes like those I've cleaned up recently make this article stylistically inconsistent with the rest of the articles here on Citizendium. Thank you, Anthony Argyriou 19:25, 14 April 2007 (CDT)

Hi Anthony,

Not sure I get what you are saying. Could you be more specific?--Thomas Simmons 20:03, 14 June 2008 (CDT)