Revision as of 05:07, 27 December 2014 editTheProfessor (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,851 editsm →An idea: indent← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:50, 28 December 2014 edit undoTheProfessor (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,851 editsm →An idea: typoNext edit → | ||
Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
:Such a page shouold also, of course, be linked to alongside the dab page at the top of ] itself. ♫ ] ] ] 02:41, 27 December 2014 (UTC) | :Such a page shouold also, of course, be linked to alongside the dab page at the top of ] itself. ♫ ] ] ] 02:41, 27 December 2014 (UTC) | ||
::Sounds like consensus to proceed. So let's make the changes. On the disambiguation page we need to include , along with anything else also known simply as "Evolution", possibly ] and various of the "Non-biological evolution" list. ] (]) 05:06, 27 December 2014 (UTC) | ::Sounds like consensus to proceed. So let's make the changes. On the disambiguation page we need to include ], along with anything else also known simply as "Evolution", possibly ] and various of the "Non-biological evolution" list. ] (]) 05:06, 27 December 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:50, 28 December 2014
Disambiguation | ||||
|
Note Evolution is a theory
No, evolution is a phenomenon: "evolution by natural selection" (aka Darwinism) is a theory. --Calton 02:02, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC) Evolution is only a theory ,not all theories prove to be perfect or the truth or the whole truth you must include the Spiritual componant first that's fair and my advice from experience . Those first 2 long paragraphs are confusing. Can we just have a bunch of links instead, as we usually do on disambig pages? Uncle Ed 17:06, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
Also, this page is so exhaustive as to be exhausting. Can we have a subset which describes evolution as one of the terms used in the creation-evolution debate? Uncle Ed 19:31, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
The pokemon comment seems out of nowhere and should be removed or placed other than the introductory paragraph.
Theistic evolution
For the time being, I have added Theistic evolution under the Science section. If someone believes it would be more appropriate under the Other section (due to its Creationist associations), feel free to move it.
Ayla 18:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Goal-oriented
There is a contradiction here. In the 'introduction' it is said that evolution is always not goal-oriented. But later the term evolution is applied to technological evolution. As far as I can see, the latter is goal-oriented. Should this contradiction not be expressively mentioned? Cayambe 16:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
This seems wrong:
<<In this sense, we may observe that a system transforms itself in another one. In opposite to design and control processes an evolution is caused by natural forces.>>
Automobiles designs have evolved and so have languages and many other things not by 'natural forces' Dontletmedown 19:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Evolution (term)
I find it somewhat disconcerting that there is a huge See also link, and that evolution (term) does not appear anywhere in this article.--04:27, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
MOSDAB + PRIMARY
The page opens with a MosDab which links to Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages which makes the claim that "things that have "evolution" in the title but aren't known as simply "evolution" should be in the See also or deleted from the page. See WP:MOSDAB." but in fact MOS:DABPRIMARY says something completely different and that we should be linking to primary topic issues at the top of the article and not shoved away in the see also section as claimed. What it says is "Since it is unlikely that this primary topic is what readers are looking for if they have reached the disambiguation page, it should not be mixed in with the other links. It is recommended that the link back to the primary topic appear at the top, in a brief explanatory sentence." I am therefore going to change the page on this basis. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 03:40, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
- Great! Thanks SqueakBox. I've followed your lead and my understanding of WP:MOSDAB. See what you think. Beyond refinements of this disambiguation article, the Evolution (term) article needs a good rewrite with references. TheProfessor (talk) 15:29, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Epipelagic, for your contribution to organization and completeness of this article. TheProfessor (talk) 22:05, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Introducing disambiguation list
Hi User:Apokryltaros. Thanks for your recent edit using the wording "Outside of science, the word 'evolution' is also sometimes used colloquially to describe:" As originally placed, this phrase was meant to introduce other uses (as is the common practice for other disambiguation pages), some scientific, some specific to other fields, some colloquial, and some in other realms. As it reads, it refers to Evolution (term), which as written emphasizes biological evolution and provides some history and usage in other fields. My suggestion is to not add spin, but rather to use the more common phrasing "Evolution and Evolutionary may also refer to:". It might make sense to move the entry Evolution (term) inside one of the lists below, though I favor improving that article with a clean rewrite based on solid sources. TheProfessor (talk) 01:39, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
- For now, I amended it by appending it with "biological"--Mr Fink (talk) 01:41, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for responding Mr Fink. That is better, but not accurate, in that the Evolution (term) article indicates that the primary use is Biological. Also, the term "colloquial" is clearly not appropriate, because many of the uses involve specific technical terms, including in other scientific fields and technology. Also, it is not really appropriate to make changes while it is under discussion. I suggest you read the current Evolution (term) article and offer your opinion. Please understand that I do not have a particular agenda, except that this be done thoughtfully. Incidentally, by training I have a PhD in Evolutionary biology, but that is not relevant here per se, except that I am familiar with literature and history concerning the term. TheProfessor (talk) 01:51, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
I propose the following text:
- Evolution and Evolutionary may refer to:
- Evolution (term), accumulation of change, continuous directional change, predominantly used in biology to refer to change over generations, and in other disciplines to refer to system change over time (including chemistry, economics, linguistics, astronomy, culture, philosophy, etc.).
TheProfessor (talk) 03:37, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
I am going ahead with the proposed change. Let me know if there is further discussion. TheProfessor (talk) 16:46, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Completeness and organization
Thank you Epipelagic for your substantial effort with completeness and organization of entries for Evolution (disambiguation). There are truly an impressive number of articles that use the term "evolution" or "evolutionary", and the vast majority are about biological evolution.
A few points to consider:
- Organization: The organization of headings is by logic first and then alphabetical (for example placing "Fundamentals" as the first subheading under the heading "Biological evolution"). Fortunately often the logical organization coincides with the alphabetical order. If there is no clear logical preference, then alphabetical order is best. This will probably require a bit more tweaking, and there may be some different ideas about logic or which categories to make into subheadings.
- Alternate naming that includes term "evolution": At present, as far as I know, this list only includes articles that explicitly use the term "evolution" or "evolutionary" in the name of the article. Many articles have alternative names, often listed in bold in the article lede. It would make sense to include these articles as entries in this disambiguation list, or at least a key subset; however this would also make the list longer and potentially cumbersome (and also even more impressive). I suggest scouring the key evolutionary articles and adding what proves most appropriate.
- Evolution (term): At present this term is placed at the top after an introductory phrase. This is probably appropriate because this entry uses only the term "Evolution", with parenthetical disambiguation "(term)", and without other adjectives of modifiers. In a sense it provides the overall view of the use of the term "evolution" for all listings that follow. At present Evolution (term) is an incomplete article (mostly gutted of content and without references). In my opinion, a solid rewrite of this article, focusing on etymology, history, and usage, is a relatively high priority because this is a high profile positioning, and important to make available for Misplaced Pages users trying to understand usage of the term "evolution".
- Computation and computer science: As I understand "Evolutionary computation" is a subfield of "Artificial intelligence" in "Computer science". We need to be careful about articles that belong under "Computer science" or other "Non-biological evolution" topics.
- Religious views and controversy: These are currently listed as subheadings under "Biological evolution", and could appropriately be moved as their own separate headings; though I think they are good here. There is overlap, but the "Religious views" articles are broader in scope and not necessary about controversy (often about acceptance), whereas the "Controversy" articles specifically focus on controversy.
- Entry descriptions: All the entries require concise descriptions (sentence fragments, without periods or other punctuation at end). Help would be appreciated.
TheProfessor (talk) 17:20, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- I added biological articles with the term "evolution" or "evolutionary" in the title so we could see what was there. I'm not sure whether or to what extent a disambiguation page should strive for completeness. The relevant guideline is not very helpful. Contrasted with other pages such as Mathematics (disambiguation), it seems that this page is going out of control.
- Instead of including such article, Physics (disambiguation) just lists them as in
- We could similarly list them here as
- There are other ways to summarise this information. One is to use categories, such as Category:Evolution. Another is the assessment statistics from a relevant project. Another is to use navigation templates. Yet another is to construct an outline such as Outline of evolution.
- There are already two competing navigation templates for biological evolution, a sidebar {{Evolutionary biology}}, and a bottom template {{Evolution}}. It is now clear that both these templates are very incomplete. One of them should be made redundant. I would prefer to retain and expand the bottom template, as sidebars can become intrusive, and even objectionable when several projects have a claim on the same article.
- We could construct a new outline article and seed it with the content built so far. I've canvassed WikiProject Evolutionary biology for wider input. --Epipelagic (talk) 20:26, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Good points, Epipelagic. Yes, this page has grown more than I ever expected, and it would be valuable to reassess how to proceed, with consideration of guidelines and options. I think the page is good for now, and relatively easy to navigate based on headings and subheadings. The Physics (disambiguation) model could be a good alternative. Capturing this information in the bottom navigation template and retiring the sidebar makes sense to me. TheProfessor (talk) 21:42, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- While this list is impressive, the majority of the entries here should simply not be here, as they are partial title matches. This is a disambiguation page, not an outline or directory. It might be prudent to create Outline of evolution, in the format Outline of biology, but every entry here of the form "Evolution of ..." should be purged, replaced with simple All pages with titles containing evolution or similar as above. --Animalparty-- (talk) 23:39, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- I have gone ahead and boldly removed the entries. More pruning and cleanup can be performed. --Animalparty-- (talk) 23:48, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Well that was certainly abrupt and puts us firmly in our place. --Epipelagic (talk) 00:04, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Note also that there is Index of evolutionary biology articles, to add to the number of avenues (categories, templates, outlines, oh my!) --Animalparty-- (talk) 23:55, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Animalparty. I'll ponder this more, and may well agree. At minimum we should consider adding back part or all of Non-biological evolution list, along with Evolutionary computation. In terms of "boldly" removing all entries while we were having a discussion about how best to proceed, in the interest of civility, in this case etiquette and goodwill, along with recognition of the effort involved, it would better serve the Misplaced Pages community to move a little slower, perhaps join the discussion and get consensus, and then act. TheProfessor (talk) 01:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Fair enough, I've reverted my purge for the discussion. Cheers, --Animalparty-- (talk) 01:52, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks --Animalparty--. It does feel right to finish the discussion, and we don't have to draw this out. I suspect we may arrive at a similar solution. I'm grateful for your knowledge and boldness. Epipelagic, what are your thoughts, given that you put a lot of effort into this, and have thought about it carefully?
- Fair enough, I've reverted my purge for the discussion. Cheers, --Animalparty-- (talk) 01:52, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks Animalparty. I'll ponder this more, and may well agree. At minimum we should consider adding back part or all of Non-biological evolution list, along with Evolutionary computation. In terms of "boldly" removing all entries while we were having a discussion about how best to proceed, in the interest of civility, in this case etiquette and goodwill, along with recognition of the effort involved, it would better serve the Misplaced Pages community to move a little slower, perhaps join the discussion and get consensus, and then act. TheProfessor (talk) 01:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Well again, the current material could be used to start Outline of evolution (which is a "list of evolution topics"), and as SqueakBox suggests below, a link to that could be near the top of the dab page. Outline of evolution would overlap with Outline of biology, and would need a bit of thought. However, outlines rarely get a lot of views. More important would be refurbishing the navigation template, and making sure it is at the bottom of the relevant articles.
An idea
Perhaps we should have a page of List of evolution topics and link to that from the top of this dab page. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 02:16, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Such a page shouold also, of course, be linked to alongside the dab page at the top of Evolution itself. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 02:41, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- Sounds like consensus to proceed. So let's make the changes. On the disambiguation page we need to include Evolutionary biology, along with anything else also known simply as "Evolution", possibly Evolutionary computation and various of the "Non-biological evolution" list. TheProfessor (talk) 05:06, 27 December 2014 (UTC)