Timeline for Does Nutrition really deserve top billing on this site?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:46 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://fitness.stackexchange.com/ with https://fitness.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 15:47 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.fitness.stackexchange.com/ with https://fitness.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 9, 2011 at 18:07 | comment | added | mootinator | @DougT Judging by close votes, I'd say it's necessary to explicitly draw out the (sometimes obvious) relationship between your nutrition question and either diet or sports nutrition in order for it to be acceptable. I'm still not sure the site is named correctly in that fitness implies some nutrition, but F&N suggests all nutrition. | |
| Mar 9, 2011 at 17:59 | comment | added | Doug T. | was anything decided from this question? | |
| Mar 7, 2011 at 23:46 | vote | accept | mootinator | ||
| Mar 6, 2011 at 17:58 | answer | added | Doug T. | timeline score: 7 | |
| Mar 6, 2011 at 4:54 | answer | added | James Mertz | timeline score: 8 | |
| Mar 5, 2011 at 22:23 | comment | added | Ivo Flipse | If nutrition is part of being fit, then it doesn't have to be in the name of the site to be part of the scope. As for specializing, there are so many forms of exercise in the world, that I simply cannot agree with that statement @Chris S | |
| Mar 5, 2011 at 20:35 | comment | added | Chris S | I think the site will specialize too much if it tries to limit the nutrition questions. | |
| Mar 5, 2011 at 20:11 | comment | added | James Mertz | perhaps the title should say "Fitness and Sports Nutrition" | |
| Mar 5, 2011 at 19:48 | answer | added | G__ | timeline score: 8 | |
| Mar 5, 2011 at 18:52 | comment | added | mootinator | nutrition = sports nutrition and dieting, rather. | |
| Mar 5, 2011 at 18:34 | comment | added | mootinator | I don't disagree, I think the site title makes the purpose of the site more vague. I get the impression nutrition really means en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_nutrition here, but "Fitness and Nutrition" makes it sound like it's a general health/wellness site. | |
| Mar 5, 2011 at 18:03 | comment | added | Ivo Flipse | @Robert feels quite strongly about this belonging in the scope, as fitness also aims at general fitness or wellbeing. I'd prefer if it at least requires a vague relation towards exercising, because it makes the site more coherent and defines the boundaries of the site much better than it is right now | |
| Mar 5, 2011 at 17:27 | history | asked | mootinator | CC BY-SA 2.5 |