User talk:Institutionalist

Welcome!
Hello, Institutionalist, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Double Movement, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! &mdash;  Masum Ibn Musa  Conversation 07:42, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

August 2015
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Administered prices has been reverted. Your edit here to Administered prices was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.pt/2014/02/mark-up-pricing-in-12-nations-empirical.html) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, fansite, or similar site (see 'Links to avoid', #11), then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest). If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 04:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Ways to improve Double Movement
Hi, I'm Jbhunley. Institutionalist, thanks for creating Double Movement!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please consider returning to the article to address this.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. J bh Talk  13:10, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Why I removed the Communitarianism sidebar
Hi Institutionalist. I see you are relatively new to Wikipedia editing, so I wanted to tell you - in more detail than I coild on the Radical centrism history page - why I removed your sidebar from the Radical centrism page.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not a record of what its editors think "should" be, it is a record of what crdeible secondary sources say. Hence, it doesn't matter whether you or I or ant othe editor considers communitariabism to be an overarching category for radical cebntrism. Before any of us can make that claim, there has to be evidence, in Wikipedia, that credible secondary sources have said so. And so far, there is nothing on either the Communitarianism or Radical centrism psages to suggest that that is so. Hence the removal of the sidebar. Please don't take it personally.

Another reason the sidebar was removed - separate from the first - is that over the years the Radical centrism article became a notorious example of what Wikipedia editors call a "clothes horse." People were slapping their preferred ideas or concepts onto that page, almost always without footnotes. In addition, the page listed a galaxy of websites from non-notable sources. The original creator of that page and I cleated that up a couple of years ago, and I continue trying to ensure that that doesn't happen again, for it destroys the credibility and use-value of a page, as I'm sure you can imagine. Even as it is now, it is a relatively long and complex page. So like all of the best Wikipedia pages, that page now tries to keep clutter to a minimum. So the two great overarching categories of Liberalism and Conservatism are the only sidebars, and other related concepts have gone into the "Categories" section, the "See also" section, or both. You may want to add Communitarianism to the "See also" section, and I would certainly support you if you do so.

Hope this explanation helps. - Babel41 (talk) 07:46, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Historical school of economics has been nominated for discussion
Category:Historical school of economics, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Editor2020, Talk 03:46, 21 April 2016 (UTC)