Talk:Society

Non-human societies

I notice that the collage (and to a lesser extent, the lead) includes non-human societies, whereas the body of the article is basically only about human society (the biology discussion mentions other animals, but only in comparison to humans). Is there another article that could be better-suited to discuss non-human society? I'd recommend placing an {{About}} hatnote for that at the top, and then focusing exclusively on human society here. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed this article should focus on human societies. I'm not sure whether non-human societies are really a notable subject? I didn't come across any discussion of that in all my reading for this article. I'll remove fish from the photos in the side bar. Cheers, Of the universe (say hello) 00:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Illustrations

Overall, I very much like the illustrations selected for this article. There are a few unillustrated sections where it seems we could probably fairly easily find good pictures, though. Namely, #Pastoral society, #Industrial society, #Gender and kinship (people doing an action associated with a traditional gender role), and #Conflict. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Good suggestions! I added one for pastoral society, industrial society and gender and kinship (did family instead of gender). I'm not sure what to add for conflict. Cheers, Of the universe (say hello) 00:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

I tried out a painting of Napoleon's retreat for that section, and made a few other image tweaks. They'll all need alt text if this goes toward FAC (which I hope it will!). Cheers, Sdkb ^talk 06:09, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Merge proposal

• Social ====>>> Society

WP:NATURAL and the other article is not the primary topic. Sources: Social Problems Readings with Four Questions Template:ISBN Electronic Constitution Social, Cultural, and Political Implications Template:ISBN :

1. REDIRECT Template:Reply to

Template:Redirect category shell168.195.24.223 (talk) 21:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose - no other article title has been proposed for a merge with this one. 1948 Hgemengst (talk) 10:06, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

  samim 37.111.229.121 (talk) 00:29, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

I see now the other title proposed for merge is social, which includes a mention of the Social Wars. I was also contemplating putting some mention in about the social wars, because it was at that time, around 100 BC, that it became a matter of life or death to know who was a socius, that is friend or ally, leading to the importance of the term societas where the concept of society originates. So I would support merging and adding something competent about that connection. 1948 Hgemengst (talk) 17:58, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Support merge to Society, per WP:NOUN. Psychastes (talk) 17:10, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

This proposal is completely perplexing: you want to merge Social War (91–87 BC), which is about a military conflict between the Roman Republic and its allies around 90 BC into an article on what a society is? They're completely unrelated. Ifly6 (talk) 19:07, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Note that an anonymous IP changed the proposal to include "Social wars" only shortly before you gave your response. I was only voting on the original proposal to merge "social", along with some additional explanation of the situation in the Social War, but the idea of merging the historical article here seems misguided. 1948 Hgemengst (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

I've boldly reset this proposal to be for merging Social into Society, nothing else. That is, I've deleted the Merge tags from Social War (357–355 BC), Social War (220–217 BC) and Social War (91–87 BC) as absurd, and restored Social War to redirecting to Social Wars, a disambiguation page listing the three Social Wars and a novel. We don't need editors wasting any more time on that. NebY (talk) 21:03, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Support merge Social to Society. Social is a remnant of the early days of building Wikipedia. It first began "The adjective "social" implies ... ", and though various editors have tried valiantly to make it comply with WP:NOTDICT, it remains an article about an adjective, with a digression into the history of socialism which is best left for that article. NebY (talk) 15:01, 5 June 2025 (UTC)