Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Outline of formal science

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 07:55, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Outline of formal science

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

WP:SYNTH/WP:MADEUP, the assumption that logic, mathematics, and statistics are "formal sciences" is highly controversial and completely uncited here, and the other entries such as Systems science and Computer science are very often considered Applied science. This imagined hierarchy of the sciences appears to originate wholly from wikipedia editors. - car chasm (talk) 19:08, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy and Mathematics. - car chasm (talk) 19:08, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Lists. WJ94 (talk) 11:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment "Formal" and "applied" are not antonyms. There is precedent in philosophy, and in military circles, for treating concepts, methods, and algorithms that apply widely across multiple fields of science and engineering as part of formal science, e.g., Springer link, and its pdf. Operations research, Cybernetics, Control theory, and Systems theory all fall into this category. So the inclusion in this outline seems reasonable. Part of the challenge is that "formal science" means different things in say mathematical culture (formal language vs semantic models) and military culture (formal method vs semantic applications). That said, the nom is correct that the outline needs much netter sourcing to establish inclusion criteria and the hierarchy given. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 17:42, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete indiscriminate list of random things without recognizable real-world criteria Dronebogus (talk) 10:57, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. "Formal science" is a thing (surprise!), and logic, math, statistics, computer science, etc. come under its umbrella, but there's no need to list all the subfields of each one. Formal science#Branches is sufficient. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:26, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.