Talk:Ekistics
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Architectural history. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
Contents |
[edit] Ekistic Units
I've added the Ekistic units at the end of the article, since its useful information. I've tried to create a redirection...something like: when someone searches for "ekistic units" he will be redirected for this article... but I simply don't know how!! @.@ Someone can do this please?
[edit] External link
I've added the Ekistics.org external link also. Hope it helps
[edit] Further modifications
I've added an encyclopaedia britannica reference and remove the "citation needed" tag.
[edit] Ekistics and Hexagons; neutrality of article disputed
If Ekistics is the science of settlement(s) (as it usually is given), then the "hexagon thing" isn't a primary tenet, so much as a point of view advocated by some principle people. Just like some physicists advocate a variable speed of light, where others don't. Except wheras the physics may one day be settled, in architecture, planning, there is no "right or wrong", just different causes and effects, and to reduce a science to a study of grid-patterning (of which only one is right) is a somewhat naive approach akin to that taught to fist year undergraduates.
There are few hexagonal-grid cities; to claim a science has a primary tenet which nobody deals with is to put a Science on a similar footing to astrology, ie not a real science, which "the study of human settlement" certainly is. There has been a magazine called ekistics since 1964 (monthly), if the hexagonal claim were so important in 40 years it would have risen to greater prominance, surely. As it is, it's more like Buckminster Fuller's tetrahedral domes; interesting geometry.
I suggest the article is misleading at present and should be modified. Certainly a reference to the study of city grids as one facet of the science is entirely appropriate, but should be neutral in form. Perhaps the whole topic should be expanded, albeit more neutrally. Graldensblud 16:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
