Jump to content

Talk:Order

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Waffen-SS)

[edit]

why don't you list Heinrich Himmler's WAFFEN-SS, as it was the secular military and racial order of the Third Reich. _ Janine —Preceding unsigned comment added by Puceron (talkcontribs) 07:38, 11 August 2009

Clean-up

[edit]

This was tagged for clean-up in Jan 2009. No reason was given, but many issues have been addressed since then. My remaining concern is whether all of these could be described as 'order', or if 'order' is just one of the words in the title. What do other people think? Boleyn3 (talk) 13:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few which I find do not really belong here, as they are more "well, you can find yourself using the word order when talking about that topic, but it isn't a word used to refer to the topic itself" than actual uses of the word.
* The contrary of chaos, disorder (in the sense of randomness), or entropy (is there an actual article on order in that sense?)
* A way of categorizing the size of lighthouse Fresnel lenses
* Ordered or unordered data in data synchronization
* Ordered list is an HTML element
* Way of categorizing Electronic filters by steepness, see Filter design and Elliptic filter
For some of these, I am not familiar with the topic, but somehow I doubt there are many links on WP pointing to 'Order' that should instead point to Filter design or Elliptic filter, for example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.144.27.39 (talk) 13:30, 25 October 2006

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerzy (talkcontribs) --Jerzyt 04:54, 9 September 2009 UTC}}Belated sig

Jerzy, what is an "SIA"? Please translate that abbreviation into English. Michael Hardy (talk) 12:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Religious order should definitely still be in (commonly referred to as order). There may be a few more but I don't have time right now to go through it. I am really dubious about the move you have carried out. The history should have stayed here. Creating the list article is ok, but doing it as a move is not. SpinningSpark 06:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you prefer having the edit history with the accompanying Dab, that's tolerable. The hx does two things:
    1. Provides attribution per GFDL, which is a legal necessity (& AFAIK perhaps for CC-BY-SA 3.0 as well). When content is split, it is theoretically possible to split the history, but the cases where that is not an impediment to accurately construing it are few and far between. Altho in this case it turned out that the SIA had less substance than the pre-split glance it deserved had suggested, that doesn't mean any harm was done.
    2. Provides a record that can promote efficiency by showing what approaches have already been considered, and providing access to markup whose rekeying is worth a copy&paste.
My rule of thumb is that material that doesn't belong in a Dab is likely to have some substance beyond the compilation of happenstance navigation-technical relations that a proper Dab must be: even an SIA is at the very least a compilation of conceptually related material, and an SIA is permitted to have interesting prose (rather than just navigation-motivated sent-frags) attached, including whole sentences if desired. IMO, the disconnection of a Dab from its history is de minimis in its legal effect, and its practical effect easily overcome by most editors and users who are able to exploit a history effectively. I don't endorse your changing it back, but that is also de minimis.
--Jerzyt 16:43, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Worst edits ever

[edit]

I've been editing Wikipedia articles almost daily since the fall of 2002. I've done more than an eight of a million edits, NONE assisted by bots or the like. Among edits appearing to be in good faith, the worst I've ever seen are this and this.

First this long disambiguation page was moved to a title identifying a different topic. Then all of the content was deleted and replaced by a short and colossally silly article. (I reverted and then moved it back.) Michael Hardy (talk) 12:20, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now if you are going to accuse poor Jerzy of making the worst edit ever you really ought to start a page where comparisons can be made. My nomination would be this from the Oscilloscope article, and a barnstar goes to the first person who gives me (with proof) the transpose of the matrix of buckets. On second thoughts perhaps we should just be civil to those editors less fortunate than the great Michael Hardy. SpinningSpark 17:51, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Improvements needed

[edit]

I've deleted the "cleanup" tag, but definitely this article has deficiencies. Maybe I'll be back soon. Michael Hardy (talk) 12:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • No doubt your removed it in good faith. I'm restoring it for the consideration of fresh eyes via the Cat that it places the page in. If it's removed by an experienced Dab cleaner, i'd be wrong to reinsert it, and i those who've complained would similarly be wrong to remove it again.
    --Jerzyt 16:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Order as antonym of entropy?

[edit]

Am I missing it in the list, or is there no article that describes "order" as used to mean "organization" (as opposed to chaos)? This is a common form of the word - one used in several Wikipedia articles, including entropy. 98.204.140.83 (talk) 22:17, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The concept of, and article for cosmos partly addresses this meaning. It was apparently coined as the antithesis for chaos, or the other way round. Kept it as a subtitle nevertheless, as I feel inclined to agree that the article suggested, has not have been written yet. JMK (talk) 22:08, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The term randomness was deleted, as the Entropy article does not draw a direct link between entropy and randomness; the latter is merely included under "See also". Furthermore the lack of articles for "Order" and "Disorder" (both disamb pages) in Science may well be justified, as "Entropy" as a measurement encompasses both, in the same way that "Temperature" encompasses both warmth and cold. There happens to be an article for Cold, which actually does little more than list different instances and extremes of it. While the article for warmth actually links to Heat, which is rather the transfer of warmth or cold, than one of them. JMK (talk) 08:55, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elliot wave, dubious tag

[edit]

This item was added by myself, but evaluating it again, I tend to agree that it may well be left out of the list. Was deleted. JMK (talk) 22:47, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Military order

[edit]

The topic and usage of Military order is under discussion, see Talk:Military order (monastic society) -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 07:32, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]