Template talk:Geography topics
Page contents not supported in other languages.
I'm wondering whetherGeographic Information Science should be labled as a branch of geography andGeographical Information Systems techniques.Supposed13:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just redesigned the template to use the navbox template. I think it looks 'almost' the same. I can't get the 'boxes' on the left (General, Lists, etc.) to have alternating colors, but I think it's comparable to what it was in the original template. This variation defaults so that the box is collapsed, so it is not so obnoxious on the pages where it resides, and therefore fewer people should object.wbfergusTalk17:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
{{Geography|class=Start|state=plain}}wbfergusTalk17:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]Are there any guidelines for the use of this template? I mean is the plan to place this on all geographic articles, every river, every mountain, etc? -Shiftchange (talk)12:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is very difficult to make just selection of geographers to be included. Its not like the continents, that there are few and well-defined. There is already geographer categories to use for those who want to explore more on the topic. Further I would argue that the current selection is poor and US-UK-centric. Of course any selection of geographers will be unsatisfying because the criteria for inclusion seem vague.Lappspira (talk)12:25, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Geo322: Please explainyour latest edit here. Your edit summary says "according to Gregory et al., 2002; Holden, 2008; Yin et al., 2008"; please providefull citations and page numbers for these sources here and explain why you believe these sources justify your changes. I am especially concerned about why you believe that the sources you cited justify your removal of items. Thanks,Biogeographist (talk)17:27, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In 2007Geographic Information Science was suggested as a possible addition as it's own branch. I agree it should have been done then. Today, there are several similar and slightly different terms, but the umbrella term for all of them is Technical Geography. Here is one source on the topic: Haidu, Ionel (2016). "What is Technical Geography - a letter from the editor". Geographia Technica. 11: 1–5. doi:10.21163/GT_2016.111.01.
Increasingly, geographers are moving towards specializing in the methods and applying them broadly to interdisciplinary topics. This is a huge part of the discipline and should be represented as its own distinct branch.
I addedtechnical geography as a branch to the mainGeography page and thought it should be on this as well.
GeogSage (talk)04:18, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Currently these three articles are mentioned like this:Pedology (Edaphology/Soil science). But it should be mentioned Soil science (Pedology / Edaphology), considering that Pedology and Edaphlogy are two fields within Soil sciene?Sr. Freak (talk)20:22, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the fact that History of geography and Philosophy of geography have their own sub-articles, I suggest turning the two of them into groups and listing them out on the template.Atakes Ris (talk)08:28, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]