Portal talk:Systems science

The start of this Systems science portal on 27 August 2007
A start has been made with this Portal:Systems science. The portal templates are designed, the first content is stored and the portal is activated. Now the portal is in need of some more information from the field. Everybody can contribute by nominating or creating selected articles, pictures, systems scientists and "did you know" statements. - Mdd 12:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

See also:
 * Portal talk:Systems science/Article
 * Portal talk:Systems science/Did you know
 * Portal talk:Systems science/Picture
 * Portal talk:Systems science/Systems scientist

Systems science portal in the science bar
The systems science portal is added into the science bar, which is implemented in other mayor portals. -- Mdd (talk) 14:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Portal systems science Wikimedia
The next template doesn't seems to work":

But I can find the problem here -- Mdd (talk) 21:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have rewritten the whole template. -- Mdd (talk) 14:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

References to organizations interested in the subject
Hi,
 * Is it a good idea to links the organizations, especially educational ones that are interested in systems thinking, theory, practice? There is already an article, although I think it needs to be enhanced as well.
 * Thanks for your time.

Harshal (talk) 18:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

The picture
I am not sure why we are using that particular diagram to represent the whole field. For a start not all systems science is complex adaptive systems so it doesn't qualify on those grounds. CAS is post a lot of the names in the associated articles anyway. Secondly it's not representative of CAS theory. It's one distorts synthesis based on reading two books. Its not referenced, published or authoritative. We would surely be bett picking something more abstract and generic. Happy to look for one b it wanted to check for first. Snowded TALK 14:09, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Notice from the Portals WikiProject
WikiProject Portals is back!

The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018. Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, support the ongoing improvement of portals and the editors dedicated to this, and design the portals of the future.

As of May 2nd, 2018, membership is at 60 editors, and growing. You are welcome to join us.

There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for improving each component of portals. So far, 2 new dynamic components have been developed: Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt.

Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.

And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.

From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject. Hope to see you there. Sincerely,    &mdash; The Transhumanist   07:47, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Model that describes when to bring in who/what to solve a problem / 17 GlobalGoals
Dear all, I'm working in the EIT community, working on the 17#GlobalGoals. We are looking for a scientific methodology describing when to bring in what partner to contribute in solving a problem. The problem is that these 17#GlobalGoals are all interconnected, and behind every goal there is a large number of stakeholders who have to bring in data-sets, solutions, approval, disapproval. There is a risk and tendency to keep everybody informed all the time on everything, leading to disturbing everybody, all the time, everywhere and people not getting any work done anymore. Have you ever come across or use a scientific methodology describing when to bring in what partner to contribute in solving a problem? I imagine it would be some tool where you can bring in a data set of :


 * these are all the issues and sub-issues;


 * these are all the groups and the issues/sub-issues they have relevant knowledge about;


 * this is the solution strategy path,

Sounds much like gantt charting. But I'm not sure if Gantt charting methodology can be made so that it automates who to bring in when. That's up to the human making the chart to do, right? Anyway, anybody with a methodology and tool?
 * and then the methodology shows which people to bring in when.

ThySvenAERTS (talk) 05:00, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Article renaming: 5 Whys > Five Whys
I started a discussion on the renaming of the 5 Whys article, which recently had a name change without discussion or an explanation from the person who did it. I am interested in getting feedback and thoughts on this from the community before possibly reverting it. Any comments there will be welcome. --- FULBERT (talk) 15:05, 4 September 2019 (UTC)