Talk:Classification scheme (information science)

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Hijacking and split[edit]

Some colleague may have hijacked the metadata-oriented article to use the 'pedia to substitute for a dictdef or article about the role of wikt:subordination in linguistics, and nobody seems to have previously done anything about it. My edit here, and the related ones among my edits today, do more to call attention to the atrocity than to fix it. My excuse is that it is more likely to lead to it getting fixed than doing nothing, and that i've stopped without doing any real harm.
--Jerzy•t 17:50, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding "classification scheme" as a further meaning of "scheme"[edit]

I've added "classification scheme" as a further meaning of "scheme" on page Scheme. Comments are most welcome! Misha Wolf (talk) 22:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Second rename[edit]

Here's the edit comment from Jerzy's rename from 2016.

permlink Classification scheme (information science)

Jerzy moved page Classification scheme to Comparison and contrast of classification schemes in linguistics and metadata: Bastard article with a double lead has been created and needs an expert (or two cooperating) to split in two, and ...

Four years on, Jerzy's hopeful hypothesis that conjoined benefactors will come along to fix this page with a horrible page title has proven unfounded.

For myself, I can't make any sense of whether this page should exist, other than the large number of inbound links to the classification scheme redirect.

I would suggest a careful comparison with semantic spectrum as there seems to be unreasonable overlap and much of the current content could perhaps be pushed there, leaving this page to take on the subject from a higher perspective befitting information science (ideally without then overlapping classification (general theory).

Is there a sweet spot in between? I have no idea; not my dog, really, so I've done what I could. — MaxEnt 00:40, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]