Talk:Nibiru

Pop culture bunk

Created; hot subject "traffic driver" related to 2012.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 17:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Workgroups

I dunno nuttin' about this nutty 2012 business, but I *do* know this: an article about an imaginary planet doesn't belong in the Astronomy Workgroup, so I have removed that category from the metadata. Hayford Peirce 17:46, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Excellent idea. I have NO idea how to do these categories, sorry if I get the wrong ones. I had been looking for a "Pop culture" category but didn't find one.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 17:49, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

There are lots of Workgroups that *should* be there but aren't. Maybe the new people who run CZ will someday fix it. Hayford Peirce 17:59, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

OK if we can bring in more quality authors, maybe this problem will get addressed?--Thomas Wright Sulcer 18:06, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I s'ppose, but who knows? Hayford Peirce 18:39, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd see this in Literature if that's where it originated, possibly Visual Arts if it is a common theme in movies. I think that Media workgroup is a stretch, I would have thought that would be reserved for topics about the media, not about topics they cover.

You can get a finer resolution bu using subgroups. In this case a 'Pop Culture' subgroup is probably appropriate, or a 'Science Fiction' subgroup. I can see a need for both of these in the long term. In the same way the Biology workgroup already has a botany, a biochemistry and a genetics subgroup. Subgroups are not really evolving at present, as there are not enough authors, but their role should be obvious fairly obvious as a both second tier categories, as well as having an interdisciplinary role. See CZ:Subgroups for more on the idea. Chris Day 19:13, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Would be cool to have an "All other" subgroup too, for stuff that slips between the cracks.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 19:25, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Do you have something in mind with regard to slipping between the cracks? I thought the main problem with workgroups is they are too broad. Chris Day 19:27, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Not really, but it seems like a lot of the traffic driver articles I work on sometimes don't fit neatly into a category. Like Script kiddie Search engine optimization SERP Naruto DVD Quiz show Skive Elin Nordegren HDMI Cat adoption Romantic love Scrubs (TV show). Bromance 2012 Nibiru. I fit them as best I can; not sure what "subgroups" are.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 19:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Neuroimaging, scientific method, peer review would be some of the crack-slipping candidates. I would prefer, however, to call that workgroup or subgroup something like "Cross-disciplinary" or "General". --Daniel Mietchen 19:50, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Good idea. If ok to use "Cross-disciplinary" or "General" let me know.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 19:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)