Talk:System
|
|
I removed a section from a previous version (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=System&oldid=11334976#Elements_which_can_also_be_called_systems/) of this article, "Elements which can also be called systems," because it does not match the given definition of a system: "an assemblage of inter-related elements comprising a unified whole." However, perhaps a list of sports scoring systems deserves a place somewhere else in this encyclopedia. Wiccan Quagga 21:41, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
(Moved from User talk:Lexor on 2003-10-16 by Lexor):
Lexor, why not use headings sections as a disambiguate means? reddi
- Because it looks like they are sections within an article, rather than separate meanings of single word. I don't think that there's specific policy here, but I think my approach is consistent with the current conventions. It also means that the article starts with a section, rather than a definition paragraph, which is not wikipedia format. If the article is getting long enough that you feel you need to include section headers, it's probably time to split off each individual section into a separate (disambiguated) article. My feeling is to keep the "science" section the main one, and move the other meanings to system (disambiguation). Alternatively, since the meanings aren't really that distinctive to a particular discipline (there's lots of overlap, perhaps we should make it a single article, in which case section headers are appropriate, but only after an intro paragraph.
- What do you think, should we make a single article or a disambiguation page? --Lexor 13:06, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- Since the meanings aren't really that distinctive to a particular discipline (there's lots of overlap, i'd would lean to t a single article), I guess it needs an intro paragraph and forward section (more than anything). Are the subsection too big to split off each individual section into a separate (disambiguated) article? Disambigs usually are short one sentences (for each item). Move the other meanings to system (disambiguation)? Make a note to see the disambiguation? If it's possible to keep the info [not slim it down (the others entries are relevant)]. I'd like a single article [just becuase there is alot of interdependence in the differing concepts], though a disambiguation page would be good too [if not slimmed down and there is an appropriate link page to goto]. I'll see if I can find the goto pages [I'll post them in the discussion on the article page, if I get some). I'd agree to keep the "science" section the main one (either way; it's the most general in it's use IMO). reddi 23:38, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- I'd vote to make this a single article and merge the existing text into several sections with an overall intro. It needs rewriting anyway. --Lexor 00:28, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)