Template talk:Geophysics-stub

Always physics and geology is not accurate
Why does this template cause an article to be listed both as a geophysics article and as a physics stub? Arguably anything in the sciences belongs in physics, from botany to zoology of marine mammals, but that doesn't mean it works well as a categorizing scheme. My paleontology articles are definitely geophysics stubs, but they're not necessarily physics stubs. --KP Botany (talk) 04:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi KP - I feel that paleontology generally isn't geophysics (unless it involves some kind of geophysical surveying), because geophysics isn't simply geology when physics is used. Could you give some of the articles you mentioned so that I could look at their classification?
 * But to your main point, thankfully someone (User:Sv1xv) finally changed this from cross-listing as geology and physics, to geophysics and physics. I'm going to be bold, remove this from "physics", and add Category:Geophysics stubs to physics, so it shows up as a subcategory of both. Awickert (talk) 20:02, 25 April 2009 (UTC)