Talk:Natural scientific research in Canada

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Natural scientific research in Canada article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

History of Science High‑importance

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada Top‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Science High‑importance

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science 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.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Policy High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy 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.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Where to start!

This is a very detailed article but.. it's too long.. plus there are various MOS problems with the content. --Cameron Scott (talk) 22:32, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

psychology a natural science?

It may be the most experimental of the social sciences, but psychology is not a natural science. Arnoutf (talk) 17:01, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is true. I am tempted to remove all the sections concerning psychology (especially as it specifically states that he social sciences are not being treated in the introduction), but I fear it is too drastic a change. Besides, it's been five years, and nobody else has done it. Me, Myself & I (talk) 00:35, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you choose to remove Psychology on grounds that it is not a natural science, then for the sake of consistency you must remove mathematics, which is first and foremost a formal science. However, it is my opinion that the article should be renamed Scientific Research in Canada, and should discuss any field of scientific research, be it natural, social or formal. There are two main reasons why this change should be adopted:

1. There are no article on the social or formal sciences in Canada.

2. This article is redirected from Scientific Research in Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Savarez~enwiki (talk • contribs) 13:48, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good points. An editor has recently removed the information on mathematics, so I wonder if we should we make a separate formal/social science article, or move this article and readd the content. One concern is that the article is uncomfortably long in its current state, but it can be slimmed down considerably by cutting out the fluff. Me, Myself & I (☮) (talk) 04:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aboriginal peoples and nature (14,000 BC – AD 1600)

The use of the word science to describe Aboriginal knowledge may be anachronistic, and this section has no place on this article unless there are sources to corroborate the claims it makes. This section is more of an opinion piece than anything pertinent in the context of Wikipedia. I am taking the liberty of removing this section, and it is my hope that it will not be added until adequate sources are cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.161.149.53 (talk) 01:01, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Should this Article even exist?

This type of article is the only one of it's kind for any country on Wikipedia. The article itself discussing "Natural Scientific Research in Canada" is a poor choice relative to either a general "Scientific Research in Canada" article with a section on the history of scientific research in Canada, or a "History of Scientific Research in Canada". As it stands the article is appallingly dense, it mentions "natural sciences" in the title of the article then goes onto to incorrectly define it by every standard, including the definition given by the Natural Science page itself. The first non-intro paragraph is literally a listing of early European travellers who made it to some part of what would be Canada in +300 years, no article on Canadian natural scientific research should be discussing things that occurred 50 years prior to the birth of Francis Bacon or Galileo Galilei.

Personally I would argue the correct choice is to rename the page to it's redirect in Scientific Research in Canada. There are useful parts of this article that could fill in multiple sections of the history of scientific research in Canada, however as it stands this article needs an entire rewrite from the ground up. SlowBrainEdits (talk) 00:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]