Talk:Nature

message: I suggest to add this recent paper published in ""Nature"" in the section "Further reading". It could be great also to refer to its contain in some parts.
Layna Droz, Hsun-Mei Chen, Hung-Tao Chu, Rika Fajrini, Jerry Imbong, Romaric Jannel, Orika Komatsubara et al., « Exploring the diversity of conceptualizations of nature in East and South-East Asia », Nature - Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, vol. 9, no 186,‎ 2022 (DOI https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01186-5).
It is about the diversity of conceptualization of nature in East-Asia (in Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Filipino, Tagalog, Cebuano, Lumad, Indonesian, Burmese, Nepali, Khmer, and Mongolian). It includes of course explanations about the history of the idea of nature in Western thought.
It is explained for instance that "the term phusis comes from the Indo-European root *bhū —which primordial meaning is “to grow”".
It also suggest to remain open to the diversity of conceptualization of nature among the world, in particular in East-Asia. The authors emphasize the fact that "To take into consideration the diversity of conceptualizations of nature can lead to better decisions about sustainability and improve the acceptability and efficiency of environmental policies in each local context, as well as internationally." Romaricj (talk) 16:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If there's more to add to the article from that source, please reopen (and be specific). Thanks! SWinxy (talk) 05:45, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 9 June 2022 

message: Hello, 
* here in en-wiki :Category:Phenomena are part of the :Category:Nature.
* in Wikidate it is vice versa:  is part of/instance of but in the description it is written like here in en-wiki: "nature = natural, physical, or material world and its phenomena"
* in Commons also vice versa to en-wiki: Category:Natur part of Category:Phenomena.
so.... what to do ??? Are those just errors in Wikidata and Commons which need to be corrected or is it still an unsolved philosophical question? Regards --W like wiki good to know 05:59, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not an issue for this article. As for it being 'an unsolved philosophical question', I'm not sure it is even that - just ambiguity resulting from less-than-precisely-defined words. AndyTheGrump (talk) 09:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are the Phenomena part of Nature or vice versa? 

message: Can you please remove the template  because it's already been represented by Redirect automatically. Thank you. Natsuinyerere (talk) 05:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hyphenation Expert (talk) 06:10, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Natsuinyerere (talk) 00:52, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2023 

message: This article has more images than I've seen anywhere else on Wikipedia, which in itself seems harmless. What bothers me, however, is that they all depict nature as if it were made for postcards (or science textbooks). 
We do not want to add anything that might upset readers, but, especially with so many images, shouldn't at least a few acknowledge that much of nature registers to us as gross or disgusting? The Life section would be the obvious place to include something to capture this aspect of nature, and maybe also one of the five in the lead could acknowledge this.
Also, a separate point: the top image of the article appears to have been HDRed or otherwise run through some rather aggressive filters. Is this really an appropriate choice for this article?
Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 18:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  image selection