|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Discipline (academia) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Philosophy has various subareas that can be about other disciplines in some sense, e.g. philosophy of physics, philosophy of art, philosophy of biology, philosophy of psychology. But this isn't quite like applying physics to music, so cross-disciplinary as defined in the entry doesn't seem the right term for this. Philosophy raises questions about the fundamental assumptions of other disciplines, in which capacity it acts as a discipline about other disciplines. Hence the term "metadisciplinary" would be more appropriate (cf. metaethics, metalogic, metalanguage).
Major revision needed
|The content of academic discipline was merged into Discipline (academia) on 21 November 2012. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see ; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.|
This article near completely lacks references. All sections without reference should be removed - it reads like a baseless personal opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 02:40, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
This article was using made up words. I removed those. It also had a completely wrong definition for transdisciplinary (which is still not a word according to the Oxford but is on dictionary.com so I kept it) StevenHickson (talk) 03:25, 24 March 2012 (UTC)Steven Hickson
Why was this moved to Discipline (specialism)?
The word specialism isn't even used once in the article. We were going to merge everything to Academic discipline. Now we have this strange title. The title should changed back to Academic discipline. If we really have to have a parenthetic title it should be Discipline (academic) like Tenure (academic) Bhny (talk) 03:55, 24 November 2012 (UTC).