Talk:Nutritional science

Science Low‑importance

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and drink Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink

Start

This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Study object vs. science discipline

This merge led to confusion, as nutrition is the study object, the scientific discipline is nutritional science or nutrition science. An article about the science should include history of the science, notable professorships, scientists, journals, key results. I started that in the article that can be found today. --AlienFood (talk) 09:02, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Split. The original merge rationale does not apply, since both pages were engaging with the science sense of the term. (Whether it's a silly/fancy degree word doesn't matter, but it does help disambiguate.) Now would Onel5969 come here and give a POV? (Also CC Discospinster for the disambig page.)
Now regarding how to do the split, my original plan was to make a nutrition (physiological process) article to avoid engaging the merge (it was a new sense not mentioned in the article after all); the ideal way would be to do a move of nutrition → nutrition science and then a move of nutrition (physiological process) → nutrition; both will need to be admin-assisted. Doing the cut-paste thing is a bit against WP:MOVE's central idea of preserving the history as much as possible.
--Artoria 2e5 🌉 15:25, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have no dog in this hunt. Could care less whether it is split or not. My only issue was that it was merged as the result of consensus due to a discussion. Therefore, if a split is warranted, that should come as the result of consensus through another discussion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:35, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just from a comparison of what was "merged" originally (basically nothing) and what Artoria2e5 proposes to break out ([1]) - the latter is certainly a more sensible attempt at an article, and could stand on its own. But based on the complex splitting and reforming that has been done at Nutrition over the past five years, I have honestly no idea whether that stuff is already covered somewhere in a suitable context. Hopefully others do have that overview :p --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:30, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I made a suggestion how a separate article nutritional science could look like here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nutritional_science&oldid=1010406688 But it was reverted. These aspects (history of the science, key results, notable scientists) are not covered in the current article nutrition at all. --AlienFood (talk) 18:51, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have to split or move anything. Just leave nutrition as it is currently (an overview article leading to the subtopics human nutrition, animal nutrition and plant nutrition, not about the science discipline) and restore what I suggested as an article for nutritional science instead of the redirect. --AlienFood (talk) 20:33, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]