Category talk:Business

cleancat

Moved from page. --Lexor|Talk 11:31, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

There are about 1600 business and economics articles on Wikipedia. Go to the Wikipedia:Business and economics navigation page.

I have put the link back because the current category system makes the Wikipedia business section look like a joke. Of the 1600 articles only about a dozen are listed and most of them should be in cleanup or vfd. mydogategodshat 16:45, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Business, economics and finance

There is tremendous overlap between the Business, Economics, and Finance categories. All three need a lot of work... any chance we could form a working group to try to tackle everything at once? Feco 07:52, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've been working in this general area and would appreciate help. What I think is a larger problem is that so many (hundreds) in the three categories are in the main categories instead of subcategories.

On a related matter, I've been thinking of a subcategory for credit, debt, lending, etc., but I'm not sure of the best name. "Credit" and "debt" are essentially the same thing from different directions. Maurreen 15:20, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I know wiki typically frowns on imposing a top-down organization system in general, but I think it may be necessary in this case. The way I see it, Finance and Accounting should both be under Business. Economics stands alone. There should be minimal overlap between Finance and Accounting articles/subcats, but there will be overlap between Economics/Finance articles/subcats.

Also, some subcats needs to be reclassified/moved/deleted. Example: Accounting shouldn't be a subcat within Finance. Feco 22:42, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This will be a contenscious issue. Ask any economist and they will say that accounting is a branch of finance, and finance is a branch of economics. Ask any accountant and thay will say that finance is a branch of accounting. So do we follow the economist and organize along theoretical lines, or do we follow the accountant and organize along practical lines? I'm not gonna touch that one. mydogategodshat 02:07, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Maybe we could get help from Wikipedia:The Business and Economics Forum. But it doesn't seem to get a lot of traffic. Maurreen 23:20, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

There is a discussion about this on Wikipedia Talk:Browse by Category. I agree that Economics, Business and Finance could be combined into one portal, I'm willing to help. --Ronreed 03:42, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

I agree that business and economics should be in one portal. The cross fertalization seemed to work well when the Wikipedia:The Business and Economics Forum was active. The biggest problem we had with the B and E Forum was making it accessible. We would put notices on the old lists of topics, but people would delete them because they were against Wiki policy. Incorporating it into the category system solves this problem. I should point out that many of the articles that the portal lists as featured articles are not infact featured (in fact some are deplorable). mydogategodshat 01:47, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I think our friend who put up the portal was putting in placeholders in the portal template and hoping people with more knowledge would backfill, let's thank her and then hop on the project. I'm unfortunately travelling, but will dive in when I have time at my desk. --Ronreed 05:25, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Possible portal

RonReed requested information on a Business wikiportal. Here is a start. I asked him for guidance on colors, but have not heard back yet. Please feel free to respond on Wikipedia Talk:Browse by Category

Thanks for the template.

Portal merge?

Should one portal combine business, economics and finance? Maurreen 20:46, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

What do you want to call it? I don't even know if the other portals exist. Right now the Portals list on Wikipedia Browse has Business. Do you want to name it something like Business,Economics,Finance? One string? Ancheta Wis 23:50, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

By analogy with "Computer and Video Games", the name could be "Business, economics and finance". I may have to ask for an admin to move all the pieces, or we could just recreate it. It's very easy, as you saw.

Just so you know, there is an expert User:Quinobi on organization who has set up a structure which I have cloned, tentatively named "Wikipedia:Wikiproject_Society:Business,Economics,Finance". The name is immaterial, but the crucial idea is that the structure is impersonal, so that the volunteers don't burn out. The structure has the responsibility, for which individuals individually step up, add their work, then rotate out. Like the military.

The Wikiproject then retains responsibility for the Wikiportal.

For the name, I think "Business, economics and finance" is fine, whether uppercase or lower.

As far as a project is concerned, I'm not sure how much support it would garner. Wikipedia:The Business and Economics Forum seems to have died out. Maurreen 01:01, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

I think the name "Business, Economics and Finance" is a fine name for the portal. These subjects easily work together and are naturally where I would go to find topics for all three. --Ronreed 04:12, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

I have named it the Business and Economics portal. I was unaware of this discussion when I did so. If we want to change it we can. I see business and economics as the two top level categories (much like science and engineering: business is the applied side of economics much like engineering is the applied or practical side of science). As important as finance is within both business and economics, I don't think it is any higher up in the toxonomy than accounting, marketing, management, or production is. mydogategodshat 17:01, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Included Portal

I replaced the included portal with the standard template linking to a portal. The portal made the category much harder to use, in my opinion. Most (if not all) categories that have related portals do not include the portal, but instead link to it (e.g. Category:Archaeology, Category:Medicine, Category:Greece). --Mairi 07:01, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

If that's the way its done in category:archaeology, it must be the "right" way. :) mydogategodshat 05:25, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Need for cleanup & subcategorisation

I've added the template:cleancat box as this large category really needs some work in refining the categories. I'll have a go at some obvious ones... Cnbrb 12:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Applied science?

Why is this categorized under Category:Applied sciences? (Added four months ago.[1]) It does not appear to correspond to what is described in the Applied science article, nor does it seem remotely similar to anything else in the Outline of applied science. There is a sense of the word "science" that encompasses everything that is an object of study, which business certainly is; but I thought "applied science" denoted the application of knowledge that is scientific in a more specific sense than this. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed it. Notwithstanding a plethora of theories and practical studies in the field, any field of endeavor in which the majority of new ventures fail within the first couple years is evidently more of an art than an applied science. ~ Ningauble (talk) 13:29, 2 August 2014 (UTC)