This template is maintained by WikiProject Stub sorting, an attempt to bring some sort of order to Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to improve/expand the articles containing this stub notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
I am not sure if I agree with the classification of certain books as science books without a discussion of what a "science book" is. Books which are specifically about crime represent a small and well-defined genre. Science is much broader, and the two books Ed Poor has recently identified as "science books" seem to belong to two distinct categories. One is a book OF science, and one is a book ABOUT science, written by a philosopher. I request further discussion before more haphazard classification is undertaken, lest someone generalize one "science book" as being representative of other "science books" even if they are not of the same type.Ichelhof 06:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Okay, how about creating a category for philosophy books? It's "science" if it presents findings, say, about chemistry or geology. It's "philosophy" if it touches on issues like methodology or "how do we know that something has been proven scientifically?" --Uncle Ed 18:55, 3 March 2006 (UTC)