Portal talk:Business and economics/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject game theory?

Hi there - Currently Wikipedia's game theory articles are in need of much work. There are some standardization issues, many missing articles, and a lot of additions needed. I am looking around to see if there is enough interest to start a wikiproject so that our efforts might be coordinated. If you are interested, drop my a note at my userpage. --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 23:09, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

This project has been started! If you're interested in joining come by Wikipedia:WikiProject Game theory. See you there --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 02:12, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Improvement Drive

The following business topics are currently nominated on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive: Subsidy, Grameen Bank, Transportation and Spice trade. You can support these articles with your vote if you want them to be improved!--Fenice 09:07, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Business and Economics

Hi, Is anybody interested in a WikiProject Business and Economics? If yes, please comment/vote below. pamri 11:58, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Started it. Please list yourself at the project page.pamri 06:54, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Redirects

You can also access the portal by typing Portal:Economics and Portal:Business. pamri 12:35, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Improvement Drive

Time management is currently a candidate on WP:IDRIVE. Support it with your vote if you want to see this article improved to featured status.--Fenice 07:52, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Conspicuous leisure

I wasn't sure where else to go with this, but Conspicuous leisure needs some help, categorization, etc. Good luck! Semiconscious · talk 06:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Are these subpages needed?

Are the following subpages needed or can they be deleted?

Also, the following redirects exist, are they neccesary?

And can Portal:Business/??? be moved to Business and Economics/Featured List and then deleted? Hiding talk 21:04, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Corporations

I'm interested in large corporations, especially in oligopolies and cartels. I believe companies are merging and becoming more powerful, while people know less and less about them. Do most people know that Grape Nuts is owned by Kraft, which is owned by Philip Morris? Or that Ben and Jerry's is owned by a multinational corporation? I don't think they do. Most articles on large corporations are really skimpy. I've been working on PepsiCo, but it's a lot of work! I don't know if this portal really deals with this, but I can't find any other portals that would work better. Is this the right place for this? Sarah crane 14:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd say absolutely! That's business:

Stock Quotes

I asked this on the main page, and i was wondering if it were appropriate to put major stock index results on wikipedia, and if so, where? In Business/Economics portal or on Wikipedia Main Page or in Wikinews?--Xlegiofalco 00:17, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I found the Economic and Business portal in Wikinews, can it go on the front page?

[[1]]

I really don't see what the problem could be with that. I mean it would require daily updating, and I could definitely help out with that, as now I am practically taking over the management of the portal (quite a grueling task :-P). --Nishkid64 23:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I added a section with stock index results. I included the American markets, the FTSE, Sensex, Nikkei, etc. --Nishkid64 17:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
May I suggest putting "% change" next to "change" as the percentage change is really much more important than the actual change. I suppose I could do this myself, but it might be a bit messy! While I'm stating my druthers, could there also be indicators for interest rates (US T-bill and T-bond, LIBOR) and foreign exchange ($/euro), ($/yen). Let me know if you agree, what I can do, etc. Smallbones 17:57, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Capitalism Sub-portal

Just wondering if creating a Capitalism sub-portal to this one would help resolve some of the conflict with the Capitalism article. That way, there could be very brief bits of information in the main article, information in the portal reflecting the different perspectives, and give more breathing room to the various points of view. Also wondering if creating a sub-portal would be any kind of duplication of this portal. Thoughts? Hires an editor 02:02, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Personally, I think it's a good idea. The Capitalism article is a source of controversy since its such a big and broad area of business, and I think adding a subportal for Capitalism would help alleviate conflicts, and be able to show different points of view regarding this concept. Can you further elaborate on any ideas you may have on how this should be done? --Nishkid64 21:44, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
I really don't have a good concept of what a good portal is, to be honest. (See the Cold War portal for what I mean. I created that one, and think I'm the only one doing anything with it.) The article is so big...I don't know how a portal would cut down on the size of the article itself, or alleviate some of the conflict. I know that it would give more space to each of the elements, though. I also don't know how to attract people to the portal to make changes/additions, and get them away from fighting about the main article. Hires an editor 22:59, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah I see what you mean. Well, I think a sub-portal should definitely be created. I've been working with portals quite frequently lately, and I've taken some under my personal management. I could create the sub-portal soon, but I would need a relative idea for what we should include in the Portal. I don't know and I don't think it will definitely alleviate problems within the Capitalism page, but I think that the sub-portal can be used as a way to express ideas amongst users and such. I have some ideas as to what to do with the sub-portal. Selected article and selected image should be from Category:Capitalism, and other sections similar to that seen in other portals should be added.
If you want to solve issues with the main article, I suggest that we should create a WikiProject Capitalism. We could have a whole WikiProject surrounding these ideas, and if people have problems, they can communicate with others. Tell me what you think. --Nishkid64 00:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I guess the idea of a "select article" and "selected image" would be counter-productive for what I think should be accomplished. What I'm thinking is maybe to turn the portal into a showcase for the different ideas. That way the Capitalism page could reduce its content since the main parts of it would be focused in different areas. We could reduce the schools of thought with brief mentions, and have the portal include more information to highlight the main thinkers. But...the wikiproject is good, too. I've seen that the better portals contain both of these things. Hires an editor 18:14, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I see you created the portal. I don't think you can take out the content from Capitalism and put it on the portal, because portals are more of just showcases of various ideas and such pertaining a subject. If you want to split up Capitalism, it would have to be done by splitting the main article into different articles. I'll help out soon, right after I'm finished improving this portal and submitting it for Featured Portal. --Nishkid64 20:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I couldn't resist. I think your idea of what a portal is (a 'showcase') is the first that I've seen about why portals are good. In fact, I don't remember seeing a definition of what a portal is, or how it works with other stuff. So...(maybe this discussion would be better somewhere else?) a portal is a showcase of a topic, with the header pointing to a summary definition of the main topic, usually in a wikipage of the same name (e.g., Portal:Topic and Topic as the main page). From there, the selected article and selected picture are highlights of the overall topic. Categories, related portals, and other items express where this subject fits within the overall heirarchy of knowledge (or wikipedia). Finally lists of articles to create, improve, collaborate, or otherwise work on are listed so that people know where contributions are most needed.
Now, another thing I'm thinking is about the whole "box portal" thing...is there any other type of portal type? I still like my idea of featuring more than just the "featured" whatever, and offer more boxes (I guess) for more detail about the topic's sub-topics...maybe I'm just dreaming! :-) Hires an editor 01:20, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Featured Portal Tips

Hi guys, I have been thinking of re-applyin for FP status, and I wanted to get some suggestions/tips from other frequent portal editors. Nishkid64 04:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC) Hey, it looks like FP material to me! :-) I have two "cosmetic" suggestions. Even up the columns a bit, perhaps by cutting a paragraph or so from the "Selected econony," which appears to be a trifle long. Also, sprinkle a few more images around, particularly around the lower sections. As long as the "Selected" pipelines are in good shape, this portal should have smooth sailing. Great work! Rfrisbietalk 04:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Looks awesome! Just a few things:
    • Are WP redirects OK with portals?
    • The 'suggest' link looks slightly strange underneath the archive link - perhaps move it into the middle.
    • Seconding what Rfrisbie says above - some more images in the lower sections would be nice to break up the links.
    • How's energy related to business and economics? I thought it was more of a physics thing? :)
      • If you look at the enery portal, you'll see it's more than about "physics." It's actually linked to this portal too. ;-) Rfrisbietalk 13:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Otherwise it looks good, I think it's ready for FP status! :) riana_dzasta 07:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree: Energy might not be the greatest related portal. Look under the list of portals to see which one could be in the related portals section. As said before, the bottom half of the portal needs some images, but otherwise, great work! s d 3 1 4 1 5 final exams! 12:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Looks nice, very nice. Photo credit is there and is very informative. Yep looks good to me. CHeers. — Seadog 13:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Looks good, but the bolding is a bit overdone; there seem to be random terms bolded in some of the blurbs. (More generally, the convention is to actually link the title of the selected article—as on the Main Page—rather than just bolding it.) Kirill Lokshin 16:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Wow well what can I say, it's an excellent portal. I agree with Kirill Lokshin over the excessive bolding, note that only the article subject name should be bolded, and not all of the key names. I also think that there should be a freely-licensed image of David Rockefeller at the selected article section. Let me know if you need any more help. Michaelas10 (Talk) 17:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • It looks FP worthy to me, although I would agree that more pictures would be nice. Other than that, I think it looks awesome. TomStar81 (Talk) 21:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Looks good to me. Overall it's a nice portal and I especially like that you include a lot of lists that seem useful. --Melanochromis 06:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • The bot updated market indices are very nice. Common on financial sites, but not for Wikipedia (or encyclopedias in general). Combining links to general concepts, history, et cetera of business alongside access to current information like this makes a strong portal. The 'Main page' gets alot of traffic in large part because alot of it is different every day and it shows 'immediate' info on major news events. Follow that same philosophy here as much as possible. --CBD 19:20, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! Thanks to your comments, we got this portal to Featured status! =) Nishkid64 21:11, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Business News

The In the News section doesn't look like it's been updated for a couple of months. I'll do so this afternoon, if I can find the time. Abeg92contribs 17:02, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Graduate unemployment

I have proposed that the article Graduate unemployment be deleted. The experts here should be able to say if the article is ctually notable or not? XinJeisan 19:26, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Try bringing it up at the WikiProject Business and Economics's talk page, or send it to AfD. Nishkid64 (talk) 14:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Companies

Hello, could you help me to complete the companies portal ? Thanks, Jamcib 08:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Article: Stock Market

Stock Market article needs work, especially with sources. Brian Pearson 17:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Saving

Saving is another article, lacking cites, and is tagged since March 2007. Brian Pearson 06:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Marketization up for deletion

Hi, article Marketization is up for deletion and needs some attention from folks who actually know what it is. If anyone can assist please visit and contribute. Benjiboi 17:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

ECB

Hi, I am hoping someone will be able to help with European Central Bank. I have been trying to get EU topics up to GA at least but I don't have the economic knowledge to do this one properly. If you can help, it would be most welcome. - J Logan t: 19:30, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Looking for help for Commercial Revolution

Hello...I've been expanding what was a small article into a much larger, more comprehensive one, and I'm seeking help on getting more references for it, and to add more text to make it more complete. Also needs a bit of copy-editing. I'm also unsure of when the put the dates of the commercial revolution, either the 1100's (after the Crusades), or the period before Columbus's voyage. Hires an editor 16:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Price of Oil barrel as of 2002/01/01

I'm unable to find this data, can someone help me, and provide a link toward the source. Please answer here and on Talk:Oil_price_increases_since_2003#Futher_research. Yug (talk) 14:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Could someone with a firm understanding of global economics please have a look at this section and help rewrite it to be more meaningful? Right now the claims made are far too simplistic and appear to be original research. Discussion of the section is here. Thanks. NJGW (talk) 17:00, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Need a template to link to currencies rate sources page

I made this :

  • [{{Currency value|YYYY=2002|MM=01|DD=01|MONEYCODE1=USD|MONEYCODE2=EUR}} Rate USD/EUR as of 2002/01/01]
  • [{{Currency value|YYYY=2002|MM=01|DD=01|MONEYCODE1=USD|MONEYCODE2=EUR}} Rate USD/EUR as of 2002/01/01]

For Talk:Oil_price_increases_since_2003#World_view. But the website that I use lack of some currencies (Chinese RMB), the site have some bug to display result, and the site doesn't look really professional. Have you a template for such use ? Please answer here and on Talk:Oil_price_increases_since_2003#Futher_research. Yug (talk) 14:49, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Business group

This very important article about one of the most important business topics is a joke and in addition apparently uses the term in an incorrect way or at least in a way that is not very common. I don't know enough about this to be able to do much, but it seems clear that most countries that call themselves a group mean a parent company + subsidiaries, not whatever the article currently incomprehensibly presents. --Espoo (talk) 19:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, I assume you meant companies not countries. Google defines ([2]) it differently (to the opening sentence) with the wiki article ironically given as a reference. I'm no deletionist but I'm not sure we need a article on this. We already have articles on conglomerate, holding company, parent company and subsidiaries.
Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Article importance

How do you rate the importance of a business article? Are there any guidelines or criteria you can use? Gatoclass (talk) 11:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Expansions of Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement

Hi. This topic is being referenced a lot in the news lately and will soon be sent to the US Congress for approval. It would be great if some people with knowledge about it could expand on it. Thanks, Colombiano21 (talk) 14:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Gift economy

Hi all, greetings from de:WP. May I draw your attention to the above linked article. I hope that I can get some support from you guys in order to clean up this article. The article after numerous reversions still states that it is an economic system, which is absolutely wrong. There are no reputable sources for this. Mauss, Cheal and Hyde are sociologists and write about moral and gift exchange. It is far from being an economic system, it is about gift giving. In anthropology you have different stages gift giving, barter and market economy (sale proper). Mauss e.g. described Indian and Polynesian tribes that by then in 1925 had no barter or sale proper but excessively engaged in gift exchange. Pls. see also the talk page. KR Meisterkoch (talk) 11:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

how to link in article

I'm wondering not about the mechanics of linking, but if there's style guidelines for linking an article with this portal. It's come up in Economics. Where should the template go? Thanks CRETOG8(t/c) 00:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

DYK

Seems we need a "Did you know" for September. For the moment, I'm going to copy and paste the content from August so it's not empty. Morphh (talk) 18:30, 02 September 2008 (UTC)

Portal guidelines

It took me a bit of clicking around to find Wikipedia:Portal guidelines, which will hopefully be helpful for those (like me) who haven't edited portals before. CRETOG8(t/c) 19:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC) Also, there might be some help at Wikipedia:WikiProject Portals. CRETOG8(t/c) 19:35, 2 September 2008 (UTC) And while the project might be inactive, there might still be some useful stuff at Wikipedia:WikiProject_portal_dynamics. CRETOG8(t/c) 20:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Need to mention both the production and the consumer sectors in the original defintition of Economics.

Economics is not only associated with human behavior. It also involves how technical production decisions are made. Both production decisions and human choice decisions (consumer demand and labor supply for example) determine the allocation of scarce resources, which in turn will determine consumption and production. Therefore, the best way to briefly describe Economics is through the following definition:

In the social sciences, economics is the study of human choice behavior and the methodology used in making production decisions; in particular, though not limited to, how those choices and decisions determine the allocation of scarce resources and their affect on production, distribution, and consumption. Economics studies how individuals and societies seek to satisfy needs and wants through incentives, choices, and allocations within a given set of resource constraints. Alfred Marshall in the late 19th century informally described economics as "the study of man in the ordinary business of life."

Every Economics text book, whether Macro or Micro, discusses both production and demand. Micro Economics in particular discusses production theory and consumer theory; and consumer theory covers both consumption of produced and non-produced goods, as well as decisions covering labor supply and the supply of savings. Please keep this in mind in this portal. Secondly, can anyone give me guidance on how to contribute to this portal? Mgmontini (talk) 04:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Applied economics

I have just started a page on applied economics. I realise its content and style might be a bit problematic and it is over-reliant on Backhouse and Biddle but I think we needed a page on applied economics. More on econometrics might be desirable. Just thought we could try this for starters and see how it goes. (Msrasnw (talk) 23:40, 27 December 2008 (UTC))

Saw this on Wikinews

The question is, will it work here? Can it be pasted into the page?

Also, I'll suggest that the Bernard Madoff article be linked to this page in timer for his presumed guilty pleas on Thursday. Any problem or suggestions where to put it?


Markets Data =

{{Stock Market data}}


Smallbones (talk) 20:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Im wondering if this information will be helpful: The GDP of USA fell 6,1% anualized in the first quater of 2009. The global investment fell 39,7% anualized, the lowest level since 1975: the most affected sectors were: informatics with -44% and housing with -38%; Ill end the data when i get back.--Momoelf (talk) 21:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Suggestions

Would this be the right place to see if there is (even a modest) interest in starting a WikiReader. The whole portal might be too big for a reader but some sections could be really interessting. I'm looking forward for some opinions. Cryptonit — Preceding undated comment added 18:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

What Energy Crisis?

I'm concerned about the dollar-biased currently present in articles related to energy crisis, oil prices, peak oil theory, etc. Why is Wikipedia presenting its data on oil prices only in terms of the U.S. Dollars? Had anyone bothered to graph the oil prices in terms of gold ounces or silver ounces (or any currencies tied to gold or silver) instead of USD or inflation-adjusted USD? The energy "crisis" only happens to US and countries holding large USD reserve (since those countries are trying to stabilize its currency's exchange rate to USD). Until those articles can be rewritten to be more neutral, I suggest renaming the articles to reflect the US-bias (more accurately the USD-bias) in the mean times. EconoBill (talk) 09:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

More then 90% of oil exports are sold and bought with U.S. dollars so the dollar is the most important currency with oil. --Patrick (talk) 20:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Energy/Food Crisis vs Monetary Crisis

True, but the so-called energy crisis (including the so-called food crisis) is actually a local event. From an economics perspective, those price spikes would more aptly be called monetary crisis. If anyone just look at the graph of the M3 money supply during the war from 2003-2008, the multiplier effect combined with the velocity of money from the increased war deficit spending as debt money correlates with the inflation. The tripling in the prices across the commodities is actually the effect of the trisection of the worth of the dollar. Also, the inflation-adjusted graph is incorrectly using the CPI without understanding that CPI adjustment is meant for comparing consumer goods across years and not for comparing fungible commodities across years. The price index from a basket of 30 commodities would serve as the adjustment better than the CPI. The articles in question present the issues as if it is a global phenomenon rather than a localized phenomenon to only countries with heavy ties to the dollar. EconoBill (talk) 00:27, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Strong biais in an economics "good article"

The Income inequality in the United States article is listed as good article. In the introduction, it says that "A 2004 poll of 1,000 economists showed that the majority of economists favor "redistribution."[7]".

If you go check the references, you see (http://springerlink.metapress.com/content/w4q363786573275h/ ) that the poll is made on economists from the American Economic Association, which "heavily favor the Democratic party".

How can such a biaised article be labeled "Good article" in WP ??!!!! Eumachia (talk) 21:53, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Microcredit

This article needs some help from people somewhat knowledgeable on the topic. Currently it keeps receiving imho questionable edits from a rather persistant IP.--Kmhkmh (talk) 00:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Portal Total category is up for deletion

2010 May 7*Business and economics/Archive 1

Svick (talk) 13:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I suggest we work toward fixing the article Capitalism up

I suggest we work toward fixing the article Capitalism up, it seems fairly neglected and considering the scope of it's influence is important and should be represented accurately and completely on wikipedia. Financestudent (talk) 22:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Please review Motivation crowding theory

A respondent to my request for peer review of Motivation crowding theory suggested that I ask for comments and article improvement ideas here. I am most interested in ideas for expansion. Please respond at Talk:Motivation crowding theory. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Selery (talk • contribs) 16:38, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Selected article, picture, economy, quote and Did you know? is missing

Looks like they don't exist for several months anymore. Thank you for fixing. --Berny68 (talk) 19:26, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Well, it looks like its time to fix the portal myself, adding with {{Random portal component}} on it. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 05:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Resolved

Taiichi Ohno

Can someone add a picture of Ohno to its article? Lbertolotti (talk) 18:27, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Page layout

I vote for moving the "Things you can do" box between "Topics" and "Selected economy", otherwise is kinda of hard to convince people to help if they have to scroll down to the bottom of the page. This is standard in portals like Portal:Chemistry and Portal:Biology. Lbertolotti (talk) 20:22, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Well I changed the page layout, see if u people like it.Lbertolotti (talk) 22:54, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit request: schools of thought

This whole part needs a serious editing from someone who knows at least the basics of economics:

"Economics is largely taught as five specific "schools" of thought: 

   Classical economics, which provided the framework for later developments in microeconomics and both Neoclassical and Marxian theory, focusing on relative competitive advantage, the utility of competitive markets, land development, the labor theory of value and the division of labor
   Institutional economics, which focuses on the role of institutional design and how institutions shape consumer choice and affect economic performance
   Marxian economics, which studies the cause of economic crises, the source of value in economics, class relations in society, distribution of the surplus product and surplus value, and the labor theory of value
   Neoclassical economics, which focuses on price theory, constrained maximization as faced by both producers and consumers, marginal utility and rational choice theory as well as a macroeconomic focus on technical analysis of aggregate measures such as Gross Domestic Product and narrow technical models whose objective is "balanced growth" between human capital and "economic capital" and which deals with complex economic questions largely by abstracting them into debt to GDP ratio and other fragile technical measures
   Environmental economics which narrowed from many independent analyses in the 20th century towards a clear and internationally-agreed set of standards from 1990 on, including the Kyoto Protocol and culminating in UN study of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity, the Convention on Biological Diversity and changes to the United Nations System of National Accounts to begin to reflect risks to, and value added by, nature's services."

1. First of all economics is NOT taught as a five specific "schools" of thought.

Economic is a science not a religion, and thus it is not taught by "schools" but the content of lectures and textbooks is constructed from various schools of economic thought which were able to establish theories which are consistent with the scientific method, and which have a high explanatory value and are sound basis for at least relatively (to competing theories) good predictions about economy.

Economics is taught as microeconomics, macroeconomics, international economics, policy economics, environmental economics, institutional economics etc., and not as these different schools of thought. However, usually undergraduate textbooks mentions only the largest two or three subfields microeconomics, macroeconomics, and international economics.[1] I believe that listing these three plus maybe leaving the environmental economics (with corrected description)and institutional economics would suffice.

These different schools of thought represent historical development of economics not a way of how economics is taught. Moreover, environmental economics is not even an school (see point 2.), environmental economics is a subfield of economics.[2]

2. This is totally wrong: 

"Environmental economics which narrowed from many independent analyses in the 20th century towards a clear and internationally-agreed set of standards from 1990 on, including the Kyoto Protocol and culminating in UN study of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity, the Convention on Biological Diversity and changes to the United Nations System of National Accounts to begin to reflect risks to, and value added by, nature's services."

- This is totally wrong, Environmental economics is defined as: “part of economics which deals with interrelationship between environment and economic development and studies the ways and means by which the former is not impaired nor the latter impeded It is thus a branch of economics which discusses about the impacts of interaction between men and nature and finds human solutions to maintain harmony between men and nature.[3]

3. This is also wrong:

"Marxian economics, which studies the cause of economic crises, the source of value in economics, class relations in society, distribution of the surplus product and surplus value, and the labour theory of value."

First of all every school of economic tough from classical to new neoclassical-synthesis studied/is studying the cause of economic crises and the source of value in economics. Marxian school had only a different approach to these question in the same way as different historical school of biology studied the origin of species differently and with different approach.

Moreover the theory of value which Marxist economics uses is actually the classical theory of value or labor theory of value, so how can anyone even say something like that this school studies the sources of value. Furthermore, the most notable contributions into the understanding of the business cycle or "economic crisis" were done by Keynesian, Monetarist, Neokeynesian and Neoclasical school.

Here is some workable definition of Marxist economics: In Marxist economics, the objective is to explain the existence of profits despite the fact that "labor produces all value," and to use the explanation as a tool to understand, and anticipate, the dynamics of capitalist society. The Marxist labor theory of value holds: In a capitalist economy,the "natural price" or value of any commodity is its cost of production"[4]

Furthermore, why heterodox school like Marxian economics, which standing in present day economics is similar to the standing of creationism in biology was included and schools like Keynesian, or Neokeynesian which were/are part of mainstream economics are absolutely omitted? Omitting these schools, when dealing with schools of economics tough is like omitting Newton´s physics in article about physics.

I mean, I understand that Marxian school is attractive to non-economics majors, but I always though that wikipedia contributors should at least try to stay unbiased. I think that this was done by someone with either ideological bias, or poor knowledge since even Nobel laureates in economics like Solow and Stigler who hold strong left wing world-views said about the Marxian economics that:

"Economists working in the Marxian-Sraffian tradition represent a small minority of modern economists, and that their writings have virtually no impact upon the professional work of most economists in major English-language universities." - George Stigler.

"Marx was an important and influential thinker, and Marxism has been a doctrine with intellectual and practical influence. The fact is, however, that most serious English-speaking economists regard Marxist economics as an irrelevant dead end." Robert Solow

Moreover, Marxian economic school or references to it are almost non-existent in standard economic textbooks (with exception of economic history). I learned undergraduate economics from Samuelson and Nordhaus´s Famous Economics, and Mankiw´s principles of economics, which are perhaps the most widely used undergrad textbooks in the whole world, and I never noticed anything about Marxian economics. [5][6]

This makes sense since Marxian school represent more a part of economic history like historical school, or classical school for example. I know that it is still popular among people and that is ok, but this page should represent the profile of economics, not profile of popular public opinion.

Thus why was a school which is really, with all due respect to its historical importance and contributions to the development of modern economic science, now mostly dead due to progress in the field included amongst modern mainstream schools, and mixed together with subfields of economics, and even very poorly described as a branch which focuses on crisis and value. This description even goes against the description of Marxian economics on its wikipedia page. There, really had to be some ideological bias, or maybe only poor knowledge which is actually probable considering other mistakes.

But I am not saying that there should be no reference to Marxian economics, since it is surely important part of economic history and a heterodox school, but it should be properly labeled among all other heterodox schools of economics tough, since all heterodox schools are equal, and not mixed with the mainstream.

Either way these schools are the labels of different historical approaches to economics, and they should be in section dealing with history of the development of economic thought not in the article about contemporary economics. They should be either all listed somewhere on this page or left completely.

4. There are more mistakes, on this page but they are relatively small.

Please, could someone fix this part and replace schools with subfields, and include the Microeconomics, Macroeconomics, International Economics, while correcting description of environmental economics, and leaving institutional economics since that one is correct. I do not know how to properly do all connections etc. in wikipedia, and I am not a native English speaker so could please someone go over my proposed adjustments, and correct spelling or other possible mistakes, and edit this page?

Here is my proposal for adjusting the text:

Economics is largely taught as five specific subfields:

Microeconomics: is a branch of economics that studies the behavior of individual households and firms in making decisions on the allocation of limited resources. Microeconomics, applies to markets where goods or services are bought and sold. Microeconomics examines how decisions and behaviors affect the supply and demand for goods and services, which determines prices, and how prices, in turn, determine the quantity supplied and quantity demanded of goods and services. [7]

Macroeconomics:branch of economics dealing with the performance, structure, behavior, and decision-making of an economy as a whole, rather than individual markets. This includes national, regional, and global economies. With microeconomics, macroeconomics is one of the two most general fields in economics.[8]

International Economics: is subfield concerned with the effects upon economic activity of international differences in productive resources and consumer preferences and the international institutions that affect them. It seeks to explain the patterns and consequences of transactions and interactions between the inhabitants of different countries, including trade, investment and migration.[9]

Environmental Economics: “part of economics which deals with interrelationship between environment and economic development and studies the ways and means by which the former is not impaired nor the latter impeded It is thus a branch of economics which discusses about the impacts of interaction between men and nature and finds human solutions to maintain harmony between men and nature.[10]

Institutional Economics: which focuses on the role of institutional design and how institutions shape consumer choice and affect economic performance

However, there are also others subfield of economics (see:http://www.aeaweb.org/students/Fields.php)

Alternatively it would be enough to only include Micro and Macro economics, since those are the major branches and others are less relevant, and I am not sure if it would be fair to include institutional economics or ecological economics and not to include also agrarian economics, or financial economics etc.

1muflon1 (talk) 22:57, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

PS: If you have more time please look also on the rest of the page, there are other small mistakes here and there.

  1. ^ Mankiw, N. Gregory (2012). Principles of economics (6. ed. ed.). Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-0538453059. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  2. ^ Sankar, S. (2001). nvironmental Economics. Oxford University Press.
  3. ^ Sankar, S. (2001). nvironmental Economics. Oxford University Press.
  4. ^ Drexel, McCain. "1 Marxist Economics: Introduction" (PDF). Retrieved 8 February 2014.
  5. ^ Mankiw, N. Gregory (2012). Principles of economics (6. ed. ed.). Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-0538453059. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  6. ^ Nordhaus, Paul A. Samuelson, William D. (2005). Economics (18th ed. ed.). Boston [etc.]: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. ISBN 978-0072872057. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  7. ^ Mankiw, N. Gregory (2012). Principles of economics (6. ed. ed.). Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-0538453059. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  8. ^ Mankiw, N. Gregory (2012). Principles of economics (6. ed. ed.). Mason, Ohio: South-Western Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-0538453059. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  9. ^ Melitz, Paul R. Krugman, Maurice Obstfeld, Marc J. (2012). International economics : theory & policy (9th ed. ed.). Boston: Pearson Addison-Wesley. ISBN 978-0132146654. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  10. ^ Sankar, S. (2001). nvironmental Economics. Oxford University Press.
The "Introduction" box in most portals is about ten lines deep. This portal's essay should be drastically trimmed. Normally I'd copy the lead paragraph or two from the topic's main article, but the lead at Economics is also too long for a portal. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Good observations, what do we need to do to get editors consensus to rewrite the introduction? Also I would like to remind other editors that this is supposed to be a BUSINESS and ECONOMICS portal, meaning that we have to say something about management, industries classification and goverment policy/regulation as well. Also there seems to be some broken links on this page.Lbertolotti (talk) 16:35, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I see that you've trimmed the introductory text by about half; looks good to me. The remaining sentences in italics could be the next to go? Missing topics could be added to the list of "Selected articles" rather than in the "introduction" box. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Resolved

Lbertolotti (talk) 13:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Bot malfunction

Link to discussion Lbertolotti (talk) 20:44, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

The Wikinews Importer Bot hasn't edited since February, and the bot operator, Misza13 (talk · contribs), hasn't edited at the English Wikipedia for almost a year. I think this portal's news sub-page will have to be maintained manually, or could be removed entirely. The Wikinews pages were removed from Portal:Current events in July 2013 (discussion). -- John of Reading (talk) 21:10, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

First of all, how does this page actually loads the news and market data?Lbertolotti (talk) 14:15, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

@Lbertolotti: Wikinews loads some extra software, described at mw:Extension:DynamicPageList (Wikimedia), which adds a <DynamicPageList>...</DynamicPageList> tag to the markup tags usually available. That "magically" picks up and displays the the most recent additions to a category. At Wikinews they use some categories to identify stories that are about economy and business and are ready for publication.
Then, over at this project, the Wikinews Importer Bot used to look for instances of User:Wikinews Importer Bot/config, such as the one hidden at Portal:Business and economics/Business news/Wikinews - a template, even though it is part of user space - and act on the encoded instructions to copy the page from Wikinews to Wikipedia. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Can't we replicate this procedure at this portal? That way we won't have to rely on botsLbertolotti (talk) 19:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

There's nothing to stop you, or any other editor, updating Portal:Business and economics/Business news manually from the Wikinews page, but wouldn't it get rather tedious? -- John of Reading (talk) 19:47, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

My points is: if tagged articles are displayed at Wikinews, why don't make they be displayed here as well?Lbertolotti (talk) 20:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Because this wasn't built into the design of the DynamicPageList software; it doesn't have any options to pull content from one WikiMedia project (Wikinews) to another (Wikipedia). -- John of Reading (talk) 21:00, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Well I made a bot request some time ago, but it seems nobody noticed.Lbertolotti (talk) 21:14, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

I've got some good news regarding the market data panel, I can write a bot to load the text from this page on the Portal:Business and economics/Market Indices, but for this to work we would need to have a template here on wikipedia with the same syntax.Lbertolotti (talk) 03:33, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

@Lbertolotti: If you're planning to run a bot then you need to get approved first, but I'm sure you knew that. Another thought is that if you're able to run bot code, then the source code for the Wikinews Importer Bot is here, or you could email Misza13 (talk · contribs) for the latest code. That would benefit not only this portal but many others.
Yes, I'll have a go at transferring the Wikinews stock market template over here so that your bot code doesn't have to worry about the formatting. The licensing/attribution requirements for Wikinews are less strict than those for Wikipedia. I'd prefer it to be named something like Portal:Business and economics/Market Indices/Layout, making it specific to this portal; your code would have to strip out the text {{Stock Markets and replace it with {{Portal:Business and economics/Market Indices/Layout. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:40, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

@John of Reading Ok, shouldn't be too difficult to get this done.Lbertolotti (talk) 15:44, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

@Lbertolotti: I've brought the templates across. See my recent edits to Portal:Business and economics/Market Indices. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:36, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

@John of Reading Well my bot works with Tool Labs, but first it needs to get approved.Lbertolotti (talk) 02:28, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

@John of Reading Do you have any idea why Portal box bot stopped updating market data? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lbertolotti (talk • contribs) 14:05, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

My usual answer to questions like that would be "ask the bot operator". Since that's you, in this case, I'm stuck! I don't know how bot tasks are set running. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

@John of Reading Well the portal seems to be working fine now. What do you think?Lbertolotti (talk) 19:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Add article alerts to Things you can do

Just wondering if someone can add Wikipedia:WikiProject Business/Article alerts to Things you can do? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 19:26, 24 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me

All work made by John Maynard Keynes is PD

On April 21, 2016, marks 70 years since John Maynard Keynes died, so all his works is now under public domain

source Keynes passed away 70 years ago today --WiZaRd SaiLoR (talk) 19:32, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal_talk:Business_and_economics/Archive_1&oldid=1079836166"