Category talk:Technology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Technology (Rated Category-class)
WikiProject icon This category is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Category page Category  This category does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 


early comment[edit]

Computing is not subordinate to engineering

Computing (computer science and software engineering) are in no way subordinate to engineering. The computing professions are huge. In the U.S., there are more CS professors than all engineering professors. The software engineering page has a long section about why software engineering is independent from engineering.

Remedies: Either add computing on the category list like engineering, or move engineering down into the technology list, as opposed to the title.. ---

These category pages have popped everywhere but I cannot see where we can discuss if they are a good idea. Is there a talk category somewhere?--BozMo|talk 13:25, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

See Wikipedia_talk:Categorization JesseW 08:44, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Layout issues[edit]

The picture up at the top in the first box overlaps part of the layout. I also think Technology should use a green or blue color, not brown - Also the Blue links look absolutely awful on brown. A lot of this page is also empty, it should be cleaned up to look much nicer like the History Category page. Wackymacs 16:41, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

The problem with green, however, is that links are difficult to see on that background. Additionally, the column list has a little messy formating. DryaUnda 13:30, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
Well, I fixed the column with the sub-categories; how did I do? DryaUnda 12:44, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

The picture[edit]

While the picture is nice, shouldn't it go on an article or category about the History of Technology, not technology in general? JesseW 08:44, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Also on my firefox it overlaps other stuff, anyone know how to fix that?MarSch 10:05, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)


At edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Technology&diff=prev&oldid=10066053 , an anonymous user added this line:

Technology also has become an accepted part of Millenials lifes.

Who or what is "Millenials"? --DavidCary 05:24, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Parents of Technology[edit]

In the classic categorization schemes like Dewey Decimal and Library of Congress, Technology aka Applied Sciences is one of the fundamental categories. As such, does it really make sense to have Technology as a child of Humans, Culture, etc.? Tom Haws 22:06, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

motivation for supporting multiprogramming in an os[edit]

Lock this page?[edit]

Over the last couple of days this page has come under consistant attack from spammers placing dozens of viagra ads at the top. Hopefully if it remains locked for a couple of days, they'll be deterred.

Hi from Geography category[edit]

Hi everyone, I'm working on the portal and category at Category:Geography. At the moment that and this page are very similar looking but we should probably aim to sync design and layout and such. You may wish to look at that page and see if there's anything you want to incorporate. I think the paragraph at the top of the page is a good idea. Cheers, --komencanto 13:38, 15 July 2005 (UTC)


Bit messy. Please could the work-in-progress page be replaced with a simple menu until the former is ready? www.danon.co.uk

Be bold! I see 5 edit sections which you could contribute to. Select something to display on the page! Ancheta Wis 20:21, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
I just added a quote by Arthur C. Clarke.
The Things You Can Do section is red. Click on the link. You could add one To Do to the list. Or else you could replace the * in one of the stub sections with text. How about it? Ancheta Wis 20:34, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Consistency[edit]

Over the past few days efforts have been made to 1- merge the portal pages of the 8 main-page subjects with their category pages, and 2- make them consistent with each others. Before making significant layout changes please discuss it so the 8 pages remain consistent. Elfguy 19:15, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Everyday Technology[edit]

I am looking at the categorization of Cooler, which was not categorized when I found it. In addition to the "food preservation" category I've put it in so far, I was looking for a broad category that would contain "household items" or "everyday technology" and have not found one (yet). The closest that I can see is the category Category:Technology in society which is not suited for this, and Category:Tools, which would seem to be too broad and too narrow at the same time ... one would technically consider a cooler a tool, but that isn't the first or second or third thing that would come to mind if you asked a pedestrian "what is a cooler?" or "into what class of objects would you put a cooler?" I'm interested in this, but not deadly serious about making and populating such a category owing to its marginal encyclopedic significance (notwithstanding a high historical significance); I'm more interested in what accomodations there are for items that would go into such a category within the current category structure. Thanks for considering this. Courtland 23:45, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Ah, I might have found what I'm looking for ... Category:Home and its subcategories. Thanks for the thoughts, nonetheless. Courtland 23:50, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

The mite is not an insect[edit]

This might (no pun intended :-) seem a trivial issue, but the gear-train picture caption is incorrect. Mites are not insects.

We could write, 'The creature is a spider mite', or, 'The arthropod is a spider mite', or we could change it to say something like, '.. the "nanogears", shown here alongside a spider mite, can be as small as ..'

I think the last option is best so I'm changing it. Chris Jefferies 17:01, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

EDRMS vs DMS[edit]

Transport[edit]

Technology has automobiles as a separate category. This could be justified on the grounds that some automobiles are not used for transport eg motor racing. Similarly aviation should be similarly classified because not all aircraft are used for transport eg military aviation and Air sports JMcC 19:32, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Categorisation Top 10[edit]

Why did you make this category part of the Top 10 category but with an inicial space:

[[Category:Top 10| Technology]]

It doesn't look so good to me, mainly because it isn't sorted in the T block but instead, in a no initial block. jοτομικρόν | Talk 13:06, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Needs depopulating[edit]

Almost all of the articles in this category belong in sub-categories. ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 06:48, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Most of the current categories belong to Technology and society. Technology Literature, folklore, websites, images ??... Why Wireless, Military Technology and not Robotics, and Biotech...??? --Natkeeran (talk) 02:42, 18 March 2009 (UTC)