Talk:Tragedy of the commons

Label, and the thing it denotes.
While the edit by user Novern Linguae means to get to the heart of the matter at once, which is usually desirable, in this case it really is quite important not to telescope two quite different entities. The Tragedy of the Commons is not, and never was, a concept: it is just one modern label (arguably, even a glib label) for a concept (or, more accurately) a range of concepts, imperfectly defined, that have been debated since Aristotle. The lead section got into a mess in the past -- see above, Lead is a tragedy in itself -- for failure to stress this philosophical distinction. Ttocserp 11:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I think before I made my edit, the Google Knowledge Panel was saying The tragedy of the commons is a metaphoric label for a concept that is widely discussed in economics, ecology and other sciences, without saying what the concept is. That's one of my motivations for the change. I'm not particularly invested in that edit though. Up to y'all. – Novem Linguae (talk) 11:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

NPOV
This article is an uncritical presentation of a viewpoint regarded by most economists as having been refuted decades ago. The criticism section is buried so far down that no one will see it, and the Ostrom's who demolished Hardin, are quoted as if they endorse him. I've started trying to get some kind of balance JQ (talk) 18:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Wrong Paul erlich in paragraph 5
Not sure how to edit, but the main info points to the wrong Paul erlich. Should be https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_R._Ehrlich 2603:8080:7400:E6C:A532:D2D5:6442:B8B8 (talk) 20:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅, on the balance of probabilities based on their respective academic fields. Without access to Nature Sustainability, I can't verify. Thank you for pointing it out. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 21:00, 21 May 2024 (UTC)