This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Physics This template is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics 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.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles Engineering This template is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering 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.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles

Surely this template has a gap between microtechnology and macro-engineering? Steam engines and electric hair curlers both seem to fall between the two stools for instance. SpinningSpark 17:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. We can call this "Human-scale technology". But I don't know, how to fill the gap. Just link to technology? - Ewigekrieg (talk) 20:09, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could we at least italicize (and note as exploratory) all of Astroengineering, Climate engineering, Planetary engineering, Space elevator, Terraforming, but not Megastructure. While the former may be ideas under research by science, possibly with some experimental studies, only the last has been actually produced. We should not mix products of hard science with science fiction, pseudoscience or preliminary science. Currently Category:Exploratory engineering is under Category:Fictional technology but the difference between fact and fiction is lost in this template. Dpleibovitz (talk) 00:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]