Category talk:Engineering

message: See Wikipedia's definition before proceeding.
I am proposing another definition. I don't know if someone else has created the exact same definition as mine. I created this definition independently. It is very possible that someone else has independently produced the same definition and I certainly give them full credit if they have. Here it is:
Engineering is the practical application of the discoveries of scientific and mathematical research that results in the creation of that which does not exist.
Almost every definition of Engineering starts out as, "Engineering is the practical application of..." Of what? The fruits (discoveries) of scientific and mathematical research. Why apply these fruits? The reasons are endless. But they are always applied with the intent of creating something that doesn't exist.
Here's a hypothetical example. Early civilizations desired an easier way to kill game. One day, someone tripped and cut their hand on a stone splinter. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH! Many scientific discoveries are by accident. The person realized sharp stones could cut animal flesh. The person fastened it to a stick and created a crude stabbing instrument. ENGINEERING!
Submitted by SGJR, PE
:Ah, but is engineering always done with the goal of creating something that doesn't exist? No. The goal is always more specfic. Very few people, if any, sit down and say, "I am setting out with the purpose to create something that doesn't exist." But the end result is always the creation of something that didn't exist. SGJR Doesn't refining current inventions count? Yes. Refining counts. The refined product did not yet exist. SGJR Also, while designing a bridge qualifies in the literal sense that a bridge likely didn't exist in that location before, I don't think it captures the spirit of the act. I guess repeatedly creating identical products would be considered "manufacturing". But the manufacturing of a product could not occur without it having been engineered. I appreciate your comments Lommer. A definition should be able to stand up to scrutiny. As high as 50% of American adults have no idea what engineers do. Maybe engineers need to sit down and come up with a well tested definition. I hope you don't mind the way I replied to your comments. I thought it would be easier to read. SGJR -User:Lommer | talk 21:37, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly A Better Definition of Engineering 

message: I slapped a cleanup tag on this cat. There should be at most 30-40 subcats of this cat, and at most 50-100 articles that sit directly below this cat. Someone, please go through this mess and recat articles appropriately/correctly! linas 18:51, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  cleanup 

message: I believe it's "Μηχανική" since it makes sense for me regarding the category hydraulics beeing in the "Μηχανική" category in the Greek wikipedia Logictheo 10:04, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greek translation of Engineering 

message: This category has become bloated and unwieldy. I'm going to do what I can, but I'm not an engineer so further assistance will be needed. --Hemlock Martinis 06:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw this in the community portal and took a look; the cat is indeed very big. However, it seems like the category can be easily broken down into a couple of fields:
#The careers under the heading of "engineering."
#Jargon or slang associated with engineering (e.g. kludge, black box).
#processes or practices associated with engineering (e.g. Ritual of the Calling of an Engineer, HART Protocol).
Basically, I'm proposing grouping according to the subject's role in this field.
Any takers? Ragaxus 03:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rehabilitating the category! 

message: I believe a lot of clearing up has been done and the category is in a pretty good shape, so that the clean up tag should be removed. Inwind 15:57, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur. I'm not convinced the "This category is in need of attention" needs to remain either - I think the "Very large" and "Constant maintenance and diffusion required" tags cover it all. ZueJay (talk) 01:09, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  No objections in the past 3 weeks, so I took off the clean up tag. --lquilter 22:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove clean up tag 

message: There was some aggressive de-categorization done during the cleanup, removing things like :Category:History of engineering. I've noticed a few of these filtering back in and am trying to make sure that any other cats are replaced or kept out consistently, and/or diffused as needed. --lquilter 22:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: subcats

message: Im not entirlies  ely sure about this, hence why i havnt just changed the article, but should materials engineering be a subcatigory of engineering? I am currently doing a university course specifically called Materials Engineering...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezrado (talk • contribs) 22:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Materials Engineering