What is this?
These are top level concepts - I want to drill down down within each one - see Concept:Lifecycle of stars
This is a really interesting classification, particularly for teaching. I'd call it an anthroponormative classification. I think we need a parallel system of traditional classification Certaintynic (talk) 23:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. This is certainly not a suggested direction for teaching - I thought it would be the easiest way to build completeness in the network. i.e. big picture down rather than base concepts up. This is why a wiki is such a useful way of building up the data. A weatherall (talk) 00:21, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
- Matter (Everyday?) added
Ecosystems (Big or fundamental?) a subset of life. Let's add that in there then we can bring it up to top later.
Is it a concept?
See my comment here: Concept talk:Unit.
Concept for What we're going to teach.
Standard pages for everything else on the site - e.g. the resources for cog-sci, blog posts, everything else.
That's what I think anyway. Yes. I realise this is poss a pain. Let's hammer this out now. My reasoning for this is I want to build a tool that uses the wiki data to build a concept map (as explained in the blog in twitter discussion). To do this it's much easier if those pages are in their own concept namespace. Does that make sense? A weatherall (talk) 00:29, 25 March 2018 (UTC)