Talk:List of important publications in sociology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to Sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article List of important publications in sociology, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

I always heard Protestant work ethic. I noticed there was no Work ethic article here, protestant or otherwise, though there are many who have one. My $0.02 worth. Quinobi 13:30, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It is listed on Max Weber page ATM, along with almost all of his other publications. I may expand this list here, but I am currently working on other projects. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 22:06, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

1 Standards in all the Wikipedia:WikiProject Science pearls articles
2 Sociology books merge?
3 The criteria for entries
4 Categories of important publications

[edit] Standards in all the Wikipedia:WikiProject Science pearls articles

List of publications in biology was put up for deletion at AfD but survived the process as there was no consensus. However, as someone who has been concerned with this Wikipedia:WikiProject Science pearls project for some months now, I am concerned. There is indeed a case that the material here is not free of a POV. How do we determine importance? Earlier this year the participants on List of publications in chemistry debated this and decided on two matters. First, they tightened up the criteria for inclusion, in particular insisted that publications that were important as an introduction had to have had a wider importance such as altering the way all future text books were written or altered the way the subject was taught. Second, they decided that all new entries should be raised for debate over a 10 day period on the talk page to determine whether they should be kept or deleted. Most existing entries were debated and several were deleted. This has worked reasonably well although it would be better if more people had participated. It is clear enough that it is not, for these articles, sufficient to allow anyone to add entries, as only very obvious nonsense is likely to be deleted. Each entry needs the consideration of several editors. I urge all interested in this project to look at what the chemists here have done and consider whether something similar or even better can be used on all pages in the project. I am putting this paragraph on all the other talk pages of this project. --Bduke 08:52, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sociology books merge?

Perhaps this tiny stub should be merged and redirected here?--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 15:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The criteria for entries

Please take a look at a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Science pearls#Header template to all project list pages on rewording the template that generates the header to this list of publications to make the criteria for entries to the list rather tighter and better reflecting the notability criteria of WP. The motivation is to better take into account comments that have been made when some of these lists have been proposed for deletion. --Bduke 00:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)