Talk:Network

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Disambiguation
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 

Odd Text[edit]

I removed some odd text I found at the beginning of the article because it didn't make sense. The text I removed is below:

Preparation a special ability in a range of place and time, is called Network .In better condition Preparation a special ability in everywhere and every time, is called Network and its ideals:

Preparation " everything " in " everywhere " and " every time ", is called Network .

Benjamin James Bush (talk) 00:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Graph theory[edit]

...a graph of interconnected nodes which form some sort of system. Many aspects of reality have a network structure thus identifying it as a basic process. Some characteristics of a network are evolutionary growth; some nodes called hubs have many more connections to other nodes; and increased dependence on the integrity of hubs as compared to other nodes for the robustness of the network.

Removed. This may be useful information, but I think it might be best located in a more specific article. In any case, I don't know how to make it fit in with the current revision. --Ryguasu 17:04 Dec 3, 2002 (UTC)

  • In a hidden edit at 09:45, 16 January 2006 Mushroom (talk · contribs) changed Ryguasu's signed account of what they moved, thereby falsifying the record of this discussion. Mushroom summarized "Removed link to disambiguation page" and replaced the lk to Hubs (now -- at least -- a lk to the Dab Hub) and replaced it with the four letters "hubs". I have restored it.
    --Jerzyt 00:14, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Removal was unjustified. The information is from the developing sience of network theory or network science. See the extended bibliography and the cited NYT's article. We probably need articles on network science and on the genre of books being published as consumer studies. Fred Bauder 12:58 Jan 25, 2003 (UTC)
    • The page about graph theory gives a very nice definition. How about renaming this page into "network theory" or "applied graph theory". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.200.55.101 (talk) 08:15, 18 September 2005

Further reading[edit]

Do all of the books in "Further reading" really belong in this disambiguation page, or should some of them be moved to the linked-to articles on the specific subject? In particular, I am looking at the "Consumer studies" references, which sound like they belong somewhere under the "Human socialization" section. --DragonHawk 21:10, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

They're gone now. --DragonHawk 17:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Clean up[edit]

I have clean up this dab (the dif), and the info I have removed is now below:

===Transport and infrastructure===

  • Support networks, such as the Samaritans or Alcoholics Anonymous
  • Espionage networks, in which controllers "run" agents in small groups. These groups then connect together, making larger networks.

=== Further reading ===
By network scientists:

  1. Linked: The New Science of Networks, Albert-Laszlo Barabasi, Perseus Publishing, 2002. Hardcover Textbook. ISBN 0738206679.
  2. Nexus: Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Science of Networks, Mark Buchanan, W. W. Norton, 2002, hardcover, 256 pages, ISBN 0393041530
  3. Six Degrees: The Science of a Connected Age, Duncan J. Watts, W. W. Norton, February, 2003, Hardcover: 448 pages. ISBN 0393041425
  4. Evolution of Networks: from biological networks to the Internet and WWW, S.N. Dorogovtsev and J.F.F. Mendes, Oxford University Press, January, 2003, ISBN 0198515901

Consumer studies using network theory:

  1. Tipping Point: How Little things Can Make a Big Difference, Malcolm Gladwell, Little, Brown, 2002, trade paperback, 304 pages, ISBN 0316346624
  2. Influentials: One American in Ten Tells the Other Nine How to Vote, Where to Eat, and What to Buy, Edward B. Keller, Jonathan L. Berry, Douglas B. Reeves, Free Press, 2003, paperback, ISBN 0743227301
  3. Branded: The Buying and Selling of Teenagers, Alissa Quart, Perseus, 2002, hardcover, 256 pages, ISBN 0738206644
(bibliography derived from New York Times article, January 25, 2003 "Connect, They Say, Only Connect")

--Commander Keane 07:21, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

  • The following entries concern changes made to the above signed contrib:
    • I have placed a box around the removed material and NoWiki'd two section headings that were moved from the accompanying Dab page. I believe this is necessary to ameliorate the confusing ambiguity about the relationship of the previously un-reformatted material to the rest of this talk page.
      --Jerzyt 04:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
    • The following removals or edits within the contrib have been reversed:
      • The part of Commander Keane's contrib above that starts with the heading markup for "Transport and infrastructure" and ends just before the heading markup for "Further reading" was removed w/o summary or discussion at 21:55, 6 September 2007 by Nisha 1486 (talk · contribs), and is restored.
        --Jerzyt 04:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
      • At 18:50, 4 June 2006 Wordy McWordWord (talk · contribs) modified the lk, above within an entry removed from the accompanying Dab, from reading
Pipelines
to
pipelines
thereby corrupting what is stated to be a record of what was removed, and arguably changing the content of a signed contrib, i.e. creating a forgery. It is restored to match what was moved
--Jerzyt 04:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • This is of no use....... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nisha 1486 (talkcontribs) 21:54, 6 September 2007; it was positioned at the left margin without any bullet.
    • There's a degree of guesswork in deciding whether Nisha intended "This is of no use......." to refer to the section they removed (including its heading) in the same edit (in which case "this" meant "what was formerly between the section 'Large Renovation Required' that this now ends, and the next section"), or (the intention more naturally given it by anyone not consulting the history) as a comment on the "Further reading" that Commander Keane had moved to this talk page two years before, which (as a result of the removal) it then appeared immediately below. I am placing Nisha's contrib, and this commentary of mine, in both places, for the reader to judge.
      --Jerzyt 04:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Wordy McWordWord's suggested relinking -- from Pipelines to [[Pipeline_transport|pipelines]] looks desirable, in the event the removed entry should sometime be copied back onto an article or Dab.
    --Jerzyt 04:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • The Dab-page end of CK's editing session involved not just a removal of two adjacent sections (as the contrib on this talk page suggests), but rather of two non-adjacent sections and of parts of other sections that were between them.
    --Jerzyt 04:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Large Renovation Required[edit]

I do very much disagree with the content of this page under the term "Network". There is no formal definition and only examples are given. Examples are very necessary for a term like this, but only after a proper definition. It is not correct to define something in an encyclopedia by putting a bunch of examples. This page should:

  • 1) Give a formal definition of what a network is, where the unavoidable link to "Graph" and "Graph Theory" is to be done. Let's say that mathematically speaking a network is a graph where some property is flowing. Thus network := Graph G(V,m) : exists a flow.
  • 2) It has to be mentioned how due to language abuse the word "network" has become the standard one to refer about "graphs". An abuse strongly motivated by the re-born of the graph theoretical field in the recent years under the name of "Complex Networks"
  • 3) Due to the vast number of examples that can be given (and have to be given) further classification is strongly recommended and examples organized into: Social networks, technological networks, biological networks, transportation networks ... and within each section include the proper specific examples. Besides, once this page is properly adapted, I would recommend to further introduce independent entries called: Technological networks, biological networks ... and explain the characteristics of each type of networks in their own entry.
  • 4) References should be divided into two parts: one comprising the most influecial papers and reviews for the field, and two, general public books.

So if you do agree with my recomendations and are interested in reshaping this page in collaboration, just visit my webpage and contact me: www.agnld.uni-potsdam.de/~gorka — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.89.176.12 (talk) 15:49, 3 April 2006

  • At 21:54, 6 September 2007 Nisha 1486 (talk · contribs) removed the preceding contribution (and a section of another, a minute later), without summary. The request to discuss how to proceed with WP editing on a privately controlled site is, i think, offensive to our editing-collaboration model and likely if successful to be treated at as meat puppetry (and i have thus struck the URL thru), but the comments deserve better than undiscussed removal, and i have restored them.
    --Jerzyt 00:14 & 04:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  • This is of no use....... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nisha 1486 (talkcontribs) 21:54, 6 September 2007; it was positioned at the left margin without any bullet.
    • There's a degree of guesswork in deciding whether Nisha intended "This is of no use......." to refer to the section 'Large Renovation Required' that they removed (including its heading) in the same edit (in which case "this" meant "what was formerly between the section this now ends, and the next section"), or (the intention more naturally given it by anyone not consulting the history) as a comment on the "Further reading" that Commander Keane had moved to this talk page two years before, which (as a result of the removal) it then appeared immediately below. I am placing Nisha's contrib, and this commentary of mine, in both places, for the reader to judge.
      --Jerzyt 04:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)


Networking[edit]

It seems to me use of Network as a verb and hence Networking (etc.)have been ignored here.

Around 1974 I and others renamed the UK Communes Movement group, "Communes Network," which published a monthly newsletter. The name had many, issue-by-issue variations - Communes Netrock, Netwrok, Dontwork, etc. These names spawned many gerunds/ nouns - Networking, NotWorking, Netrockers, Netwrokers. I claim networking as my creation!

Subsequently, "networking" has now become widely used to mean (within the 'Social' definition) contacting friends and others - and their contact - to achieve some business or social aim.

Tom Fordo Tom fordo 17:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

(did I do that right? - this is my first effort?) The beginning of this line is part of the signed Tom fordo contrib directly above it.

fuck — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.12.220.235 (talk) 04:28, 11 July 2007

.... —Preceding unsigned comment added 202.78.92.252 (talk) 01:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Major cleanup[edit]

I have removed most of the links from this page in a major cleanup, so I am providing an explanation. As a dab page, this page is not supposed to contain an entry for every article with the work "network" in the title, nor can we include every type of network there is (a quick WP search will show hundreds). This page should contain links to topics which are generally known simply as "network". I have moved some of the most common types of networks to a See also section, which I think is more appropriate. SlackerMom (talk) 16:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Good job, SM; the accompanying Dab page has suffered greatly (as has this discussion) from confusion abt what a Dab page is for. Dab and MoSDab implicitly state your principles, and clarify the implications of that; i like to emphasize that Dabs are for speedy navigation, not for directly conveying information, and thus that anything even remotely approaching a dictionary definition is clutter. Our job on a Dab page is to give the titles of the pages that "could have been" called "Network", and throw in a word or two to guide users who might be considering which, out of two of those titles, is the one they had hoped to find at Network.
    --Jerzyt 04:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, Jerzy. I was a bit afraid there would be some negative response to such a big edit, but this page seemed out of control. I appreciate the support. There may be some links I raked out that could go back in, but we'll see what kind of complaints we get! SlackerMom (talk) 12:40, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Good content sacrificed to [conventional] disambig cleanup (i.e., function sacrificed to form)[edit]

From an earlier iteration of the lede:

Network and networking in their original and most literal sense are the weaving of thread (yarn) into textile nets and the weaving of ropes, wires, or cables into similar nets. Since the rise of electrical and electronic technologies, network and networking also refer literally to local-circuit net-like connections of electrical conductors (wires and cables) and more broadly to wider-reaching circuits and wireless (radio) connections. The use of electrical and electronic networks to effect communication between humans has led to further extension of the terms to refer figuratively to any system (designed or evolved) of connection or communication between people or objects, and to the basic and applied scientific disciplines that have arisen to study them. Thus the terms may refer to: [...]

See User:Three-quarter-ten/Ponderings#A differentiation should be made between "mere" disambig pages and "superset unification" pages. — ¾-10 19:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

In my view, the following entries are partial matches and should not be on the page:
SpinningSpark 15:46, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I agree, with one exception; Flow network states that it is also called a network. I would also get rid of what's in See also. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:39, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Actually, it doesn't, it says that directed graphs are called networks. Flow networks belong to the class of directed graphs but are not synonymous with them. In other words flow networks are a particular type of network (mathematics), in other words, a partial match. And I have just noticed that Network (mathematics) is a redirect to Flow network so at least one of them has to go. SpinningSpark 22:33, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
  • This article (if you can call it that - it really is a list) is now quite, quite worthless... Good going User:Spinningspark - nicely done... Stevenmitchell (talk) 07:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)