Talk:Physical geography

Scope of physical geography

Where where can we find the scope of physical geography and also its nature 110.224.180.56 (talk) 10:45, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I think this is a typo

the article says: '...The field was largely funded by the German geographer Carl Troll.' Is 'funded' maybe a typo for 'founded' ? DlronW (talk) 05:31, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Good catch. Content at Carl Troll and Landscape ecology support.-- Paleorthid (talk) 21:30, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

See “Mental Geography” near the end. 162.198.17.197 (talk) 17:58, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

That was a senseless vandalism by an IP editor with no other edits whatsoever. All changes by that IP now reverted. 2600:1012:A021:7993:E5E0:D8D0:5789:7962 (talk) 04:25, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Where's "natural geography"?

Searching the term "natural geography" simply redirects to the physical geography article and the term is nowhere found in that article. Why is it not even mentioned? And by the way, can't it be seen as a broader term than "physical geography" since technically that's about physical science, whereas "natural geography" is a better fit for being inclusive towards fields like biogeography? 2600:1012:A021:7993:E5E0:D8D0:5789:7962 (talk) 04:28, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Find some academic sources, and write it.

You might not find sources on natural geography. Augmented Seventh (talk) 04:34, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

I've seen some interesting use of this word, and we can get into some pretty advanced theoretical and ontological discussion on the use of the words. In short, people use words in geography to describe the same thing ALL THE TIME, to the point it is extremely frustrating to figure out what people are talking about. They also reinvent terms, reuse terms incorrectly, and use the same term to mean completely different things with no obvious "correct" usage. Sometimes, terms are used to describe extremely specific things, for example a person who is working under a framework that accepts the Anthropocene may want to separate physical geography that is primarily driven by humans from physical geography that has no human drivers, while maintaining a fully separate Human geography. In this case, someone may throw the term "natural geography" into the mix. (note, I have no evidence that this is what Natural Geography actually means, just an example).

Based on a Google scholar search I suspect, but am not certain, that "natural geography" might be a term that is used to describe physical geography in other countries. It might not be 100% 1 to 1 identical, and could be an artifact of translation. It might also be an antiquated term that has fallen out of fashion in English. Some sources to consider:

• A peer reviewed pub that mentions it: Friedrich Ratzel and the nature of (political) geography
• An old peer reviewed pub that mentions it: ON TAKING THE "GE-" OUT OF GEOGRAPHY
• A dissertation that uses the term: Theses The Impact of Natural Geography on the Economic Development of European Countries

I would recommend looking through the dissertations citations rather then citing it directly to see if there are any leads. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 05:10, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

thank you. very interesting.

I thought it might fall under natural philosophy, but didn't look at archaic or global use. Augmented Seventh (talk) 05:34, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

No problem! Untangling this web of terms has been a fun hobby of mine in recent years, so I'm always excited to comment about it. I'd recommend the book The Philosophy of Geo-Ontologies (Springer link here). A search on the Google books copy shows that the author refers to "Physical (or natural) geo-ontologies", which might suggest they view the terms as interchangeable, but I could be reading more into their words then the source actually suggests. Fun read though. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 05:49, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Overview of the article

For the naming of the article within the first few sentences why not name this article Physiology vs physical geography since that is the study.

Reading on the past notes there were a few spelling errors from peer reviewed inserts that have been submitted

Some of the resources listed are accredited and provide where and how the information was found. However, some of the information listed comes from .com or .net sites. Generally speaking .gov or .org are more credible. That would be a concern using for factual information. The article I do feel gets off topic with evolution and Darwinism. I do not see a correlation besides organisms adapting to climate and geography but as for the studies listed I do not entirely see the correlation. ~2026-32906-9 (talk) 22:00, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Global Environmental Science

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2026 and 7 March 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kbkouk62312 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Hazelstar721, Lgorman0812.

— Assignment last updated by Lgorman0812 (talk) 23:25, 2 March 2026 (UTC)