Talk:Economics - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Økonom (talk | contribs) at 06:31, 30 October 2023 (→Suggestions for "History of economic thought": disagreements on the desired prominence of heterodox ideas). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 06:31, 30 October 2023 by Økonom (talk | contribs) (→Suggestions for "History of economic thought": disagreements on the desired prominence of heterodox ideas)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Economics article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 3 months

Template:Vital article

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Economics. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Economics at the Reference desk.

This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Economics is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

[REDACTED]

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 3, 2004.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 19, 2004	Refreshing brilliant prose	Kept
April 21, 2006	Featured article review	Demoted
September 21, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed

Current status: Former featured article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Business Top‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Economics Top‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Finance & Investment High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WP1.0

Semi-protected edit request on 27 December 2022

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "Economic analysis can be applied throughout society, including business, finance, health care, engineering and government."

"Economic analysis can be applied throughout society, including business, finance, cybersecurity, health care, engineering, and government. " Mazaherkianpour (talk) 13:23, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Done RealAspects (talk) 13:33, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

References

Kianpour, Mazaher; Kowalski,, Stewart; Øverby, Harald (2021). "Systematically Understanding Cybersecurity Economics: A Survey". Sustainability. 13. doi:10.3390/su132413677.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

India Education Program course assignment

This article was the subject of an educational assignment at Symbiosis School of Economics supported by Misplaced Pages Ambassadors through the India Education Program during the 2011 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{IEP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 20:10, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Stating by whom has the S/D model been made in the introduction

I'd like to suggest to modify the sentence "The supply and demand model describes how..." to "The supply and demand model by Alfred Marshall describes how..." for describing the supply and demande curves in the introduction of the wiki page. MDCCCC (talk) 23:23, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

European economics

The page does not inform about Asian economics: China, India. Xx236 (talk) 06:36, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 August 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"Other wschools or trends of thought referring " should read "Other schools or trends of thought referring" Rlu13 (talk) 03:54, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Done —Sirdog (talk) 04:42, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Suggestions for "History of economic thought"

The main purpose of that section should be to present the history of economic thought from a mainstream view, mentioning the more heterodox directions collectively at a less detailed level, preferably in the subsection "Other schools and approaches" as is the case currently for some of these. However, three heterodox schools are given prominent treatment in the main text: Marxian, post-Keynesian and Austrian thought. This would conflict with WP:FRINGE. I propose that mention of the three schools be shortened and moved to the subsection of other schools. Secondly, the current subsection on the Chicago School should be replaced by two new ones, on monetarism and new classical economics, respectively. Though it is true that the protagonists from both schools are sometimes mentioned as Chicago School economists, the two schools are clearly distinct and played independent and important roles in the development of theory - a fact which the current text does not reflect properly. Økonom (talk) 18:35, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

While this section could use some editing, your changes are too extreme. Marxian economics is a part of the history of economics whether you like it or not. Also, Marxian economics followed in the tradition of classical economics and the labor theory of value - neoclassical economics is a break from Marxian (and to some extent classical) economics and its rise makes no sense if you erase Marx's writings, the massive socialist movement from the 19th to late 20th century etc. from existence.

Probably what can use the most cleanup is the post-Keynesian section. Your edits seem fine, the main problem is there are too many headers - economists flirtation with rational expectations is not as significant as neoclassical or classical economics. What you wrote is fine but they don't each deserve a new section. I am putting the Marxian section back and changing the three post-Keynesian sections into one. Minimax Regret (talk) 18:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Our disagreements seem to relate to three issues:

The prominence of Marxian economics in the outline of history of thought,
The prominence of post-Keynesian economics in the outline of history of thought,
The use of headers.

As to the first two points, I believe that it is generally recognized that there is a mainstream research program in economics, and then there are some fringe/alternative/heterodox groups outside the mainstream. Both Marxian and post-Keynesian economics are generally categorized as belonging to the heterodox groupings, e.g. by Lee's article in The New Palgrave, which I cited. Following Misplaced Pages:Fringe theories, such theories can be mentioned in an overview like the present one, but they should not be given prominence on a level equal to mainstream theory, so I think that your recent edits give both theories an undue weight in the exposition.

As to the third point, (old) Keynesian, monetarist, new classical and new Keynesian theories are regarded as the main post-war schools of thought in several, if not most, accounts of economic theory. I cited Blanchard's recent exposition, but it is just one typical example (whereas Marxian and post-Keynesian theories are rarely mentioned except in very detailed overviews). The same division was mentioned in the article already before my edits, in the subsection on Other schools. This typical division in reliable sources should also be reflected in the heading hierarchy. Økonom (talk) 06:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Categories: