Talk:Network theory

From what I'm reading, Network Science and Network Theory (as presented in this current article) are the same thing. Any thoughts on whether or not there are actually two discrete topics here, or if this could be merged? Sprhodes (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:05, 12 November 2010 (UTC).Reply

There is a discussion about merging and spinning out network-related articles including this one at Talk:Social network#General network domain cleanup. Madcoverboy (talk) 19:08, 3 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I am unable to locate this previous discussion at the location indicated or in the archive there. I am going to put up some merge banners and direct discussion here. ~Kvng (talk) 18:08, 13 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I looked a little more closely to see if, absent any discussion for over a year, I could perform the merge. I determined that Network theory is apparently an application of Graph theory and Network science is Network theory plus other stuff. There's not an obvious merge opportunity here. ~Kvng (talk) 18:41, 18 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Closing, given the lack of a clear aim for the merge and its impracticality, as discussed above.Klbrain (talk) 19:53, 11 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

I would suggest reopening this discussion. I disagree with the comments by Kvng above. In my experience network theory and network science effectively synonyms. Network science is in a sense graph theory but approached from a completely different viewpoint warranting separate pages. The material on Network theory and Network science largely overlaps. I would propose merging the former into the latter, in particular bringing the discussion in Network theory#Network analysis into the Network Science page. In general, a lot of the pages on network science are pretty messy so the whole field could use a cleanup.--Fractalfalcon (talk) 13:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Fractalfalcon: I made my comments based on what I read in the leads of the two articles. Do you think one or both of the leads are inaccurate? ~Kvng (talk) 14:41, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Kvng: I think the network science lead is accurate. I think the first paragraph of network theory is slightly confusing because it effectively just states the definition of graph theory - where network science/theory differs from graph theory is precisely in the applications. The remainder of the network theory lead largely says the same as the network science lead. I do in a sense see an argument for both pages (in the same way that "Theoretical Physics" is a way of doing "Physics", "Network Theory" is a way of doing "Network Science"). However, the material that would warrant being in Network theory is not currently there but is pretty much what is covered by Network science#Network properties. The material currently discussed in Network theory would also be better described as Network science. Note that several sections on the two pages overlap heavily. --Fractalfalcon (talk) 15:39, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Fractalfalcon, I'm all for eliminating overlap. If you're confident a merge is the best way to do that, give it a try. An alternative approach is to delete repeated material from one article or the other. Once that is done, it should be easier to evaluate whether a merge is warranted. ~Kvng (talk) 15:21, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Kvng: Ok thanks. I do think a merge is probably best. I will get the ball rolling this week. Obviously I haven't merged before so I will try to tread lightly and not break too much.... Thanks! Fractalfalcon (talk) 15:47, 4 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Fractalfalcon: Has enough been done, or do you think that there is more to do? Klbrain (talk) 15:58, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply