User talk:Thomasmeeks

— 👍 '''Note: My reply (if any) to an Edit below is likely to be in the respective section of this page (unless otherwise asked). Thanks.''' --Thomasmeeks (talk) 18:40, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! RJFJR 03:19, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style


 * Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research
 * Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines
 * What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons
 * Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule
 * Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy
 * External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry
 * Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

Help:WordToWiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:WordToWiki

Help:Editing
ISBN 9780674313033

Samuelson, Paul A., and William D. Nordhaus (2004). ''Economics]. McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978-0-0728-7205-7. Economics was written entirely by Samuelson through the the 9th edition in 1973. In the next two editions, Peter Temin and William Samuelson were respective co-authors who assisted in statistical updating in 1976 and 1980.The University of Chicago Library Catalogue Economics 11th ed. of .[https://catalog.lib.uchicago.edu/vufind/Record/349515 11th ed. with the assistance in%20statistical%20updating%20of%20William%20SamuelsonSamuelson (1980), 11th ed., each responsible for statistical updating

Later editions have been revised with Nordhaus for the 12th edition (1985) to 19th (2009).

surfeit, Hilaire Belloc - Wikiquote. - Wikiquote For more see Help:Interwiki linking

Inserting WP-copied stuff directly into Word doc., see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNcEwF7LRfg&ab_channel=Microsoft365Developer

Alberto Bisin, Matthew O. Jackson (2010)  Description link scrollable preview. Handbook of Social Economics Volume 1, Part Elsevier Science

Alberto Bisin Italian economist Alberto Bisin (b. 18 December 1962,, Milan) is an economist and academic Italian, a professor of economics at New York University and a columnist for the newspaper the Republic and of the blog noiseFromAmeriKa.

Academic career

Born in Milan, Bisin graduated from Bocconi University in 1987 under the supervision of Professor Mario Monti. After his military service, he studied Economics at the University of Chicago, where he received a Masters in 1990 and a Ph.D. in 1993 under the supervision of José Scheinkman and Gary Becker. In 1993 he participated in the Review of Economic Studies Tour and won one of the first Human Capital and Development Fellowships of the European Union, which he used for a year of research at the École d'économie de Paris, then the economic research center of the École Normale Supérieure in Paris. Between 1993 and 1996 he was Assistant Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Boston. In 1996 he moved to New York University, where he is now a Full Professor.

Positions

He is a Fellow of the Econometric Society. He is a member of various research institutes such as the NBER of Boston, the CESS of NYU, the CIREQ of the University of Montreal, and the IZA of Bonn. He works as Associate Editor at various international academic journals, including Journal of Economic Theory and Economic Theory. He is a member of the Advisory Board of the Institut d'Etudes Avancées of the University of Cergy-Pontoise in Paris and of the Scientific Committee of the Helix Center in New York. He was a columnist for economic issues at the Turin newspaper La Stampa, and currently writes for the newspaper La Repubblica. He is one of the founders and editors of the NoiseFromAmeriKa blog. [1]

Works Edit •	Handbook of Social Economics (vol. I and II), Ed. (With Jess Benhabib, and Matt Jackson), Elsevier 2010. •	Immigration and cultural integration in Europe, Ed. (With Yann Algan, and Thierry Verdier), CEPR, Oxford University Press, 2012. •	Tremonti, Instructions for disuse (with Michele Boldrin, Sandro Brusco, Andrea Moro and Giulio Zanella), Naples, L'Ancora del Mediterraneo, 2010. ISBN 978-88-8325-263-1 •	Fables & Numbers, The economy in the land of poets, saints and navigators, Egea - Bocconi University, 2013

NoteEdit

1.	^ About us, at noisefromamerika.org , noiseFromAmerika. Retrieved July 24, 2012 (archived from the original on September 8, 2015). Other projectsEdit •	 Wikimedia Commons contains images or other files about Alberto Bisin External linksEdit •	Page of Prof. Alberto Bisin at New York University, on econ.as.nyu.edu.

Eatwell, John, Milgate, Murray, and Peter Newman, [1987] 1989. Social Economics: The New Palgrave, p. xii. Description & scrollable preview.

Archiving steps
Archive steps, adapted from courtesy of User:Anthony Appleyard:
 * 1) Move Talk:X to Talk:X/Archive 1.
 * 2) Going to Talk:X redirects to Talk:X/Archive 1. So, create a new page Talk:X containing the text    by first editing Redirect link at the top of Talk:X
 * 3) Cut-and-paste or copy-and-paste from the top of Talk:X/Archive 1 to Talk:X permanent top matter, if any, such as tag templates.
 * 4) Insert the text    at the top of Talk:X/Archive 1 after other templates from (3).
 * 5) Save page Edit from (4).

Social Choice and Individual Values
I screen the WP collection of articles once in a while so I wounded up reading your article.

It lacks in : See Krazy Kat or The Illuminatus! Trilogy for template-like articles that can help with improving the article.
 * sectionning
 * inline citations
 * NPOVness, it has point-of-vue orientation (though I don't know the subject very well)
 * as you say, linking to other articles to let other people give feedback
 * that there is no lead section appropriate to what encyclopaedic search for

Other than that, your prose is really good and the text flows when I read it. Best of luck. Lincher 15:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * It looks good to me, but its still missing inline citations (as in referencing the books that were used for the article). For more info you should ask a Peer review or go into Good article phase in order to get more in depth advices. Lincher 15:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I cannot give you more info on your article, to me it seems well written and referenced though some other fellas might find it needs more and a Good article nomination can help you with that. Lincher 23:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I removed the cleanup tag for you, you could have done it. As for the spoiler, it can stay there, since it tells people that they might find info from the book on the article. Lincher 01:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Social Choice and Individual Values
((help me)) 1. This is the title of a new WP article I wrote. How can I make GO connect to it if I use only lower case for the GO window?

2. I'd like to get review comments as to clarity and content on it before I put links in other articles. Should I just go to the Talk page of related articles and solicit comments on the Discussion Talk page for Social Choice and Individual Values? (It's about a book by the economic theorist Kenneth Arrow.)

Thx. Thomasmeeks 23:23, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * A redirect should do the trick. I already created one for you, but for more info check out Help:Redirect.
 * Posting on talk pages sounds like a great way to get more feedback. I would also suggest WikiProject Books as another good place to ask for feedback and see more details about this type of article. --Hetar 23:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Your message
Thanks for the message on my talk page. I'm not sure where I saw Social Choice and Individual Values... did you post about it on the Help Desk? It's on my watchlist and I often answer (and ask!) questions there. MCB 05:02, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

IIA
Thanks for the link to the online 1951 article. I had no idea it was online.

I'm not going to change anything substantial you did, since as the Ray article points out there are differences between some versions of IIA. (This depends on the type of IIA as well as the logical framework -- just because they're stated differently doesn't mean they're distinct, of course.) I did add a clarifier* that the two concepts are related because I feel this is important: everyone thought that the two concepts were the same for many years, and the intent was to get at the same concept in different ways. Frankly I see the need for a new article expanding on Ray's, discussing the ways to unify all the different types of IIA conceptually under one theoretical framework, making their differences clearer. Further, such a work could clarify what types of IIA are actually used in various proofs invoking them: I would not be surprised to see one type assumed and another used in the proof in some cases.

Regardless, best of luck to you in editing the article -- it could use some work, I think.


 * Actually my clarifier was poorly worded. When I think of something better I'll edit it; otherwise feel free to do the same.

CRGreathouse (t | c) 23:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

test
test Thomasmeeks 20:40, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Help request for logging in Dear RJFJR: You were my greeter on April 22 when I was a Wiki newbie. What a difference a few months make. I have since created a couple of articles near the top of Google searches for that subject (perhaps more usual than not, I admit) and edited many more articles.

Yesterday something odd happened. When I prepared to Save the edit, Wiki said that I was not logged in. I tried to log in using my User name and password. The message was that I had successfully logged in, but the top line far righthand side of my Wiki portal indicated otherwise: log out. I tried getting a new password, which was received within seconds via email. It made no difference. Same thing today. I conclude that I am blocked from fully logging on. The "fully" refers to that my Wiki portal says "log out". (I have received no communications recently on my discussion page.) Is there anything that can be done to fix this? Or can you refer me to someone for assistance? My thanks.

One other detail and possible explanation: When I originally registered, Wiki responded by email, noting my IP address. With the change in passwords on July 22 and again yesterday Aug. 3, the Wiki email response noted that I had an IP address different from mine. It's where my User name (Thomasmeeks) should be in the present message. I had assumed that the discrepancy was a Wiki assignment. But I'm wondering if the discrepancy might be responsible for blocking my fully logging on. 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Odd, you have signed this with an IP address indicating you are not logged on, but the message "log out" at the upper right hand corner is where you click to log out and should only be shown if you ARE logged in. (Note that it says "log out" not "logged out"). If it lists your user name the the top right hand section then it knows who you are and you are logged in. You may get more information at Village pump (technical). RJFJR 20:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC) I see. I have lapsed into Sign in status yesterday & today in edit efforts after attempting to log in, possibly an unrelated problem that I conflated with log-in status. Thx for your help & reference. At least my User name is back. Thomasmeeks 21:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Any way to remove underscoring of within-article hypertext?
The argument for underscoring is, I suppose, that newbies will more quickly figure that the hypertext is a link. As reader, however, I underscoring an unnecessary distraction. Thx. Thomasmeeks 15:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Either go to your perferences and click on the "misc" tab, then select "never" for the underlining links part. Or you can put this in your monobook.css:

a { text-decoration: none; }

If you don't want to bother with links at all, use: /* IE-able */ a, a.new {color: black; text-decoration: none;} /* NON IE */ a, a.new {color: inherit; text-decoration: none;}

GeorgeMoney (talk) 15:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC) Thx. Done. BW, Thomasmeeks 16:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

table example
In compatible browsers, an edit toolbar can be automatically displayed with the edit box, provided that this has been set in the preferences.It appears automatically for editors who are not logged in. This functions partly as a typing aid and partly as a reminder of the available functions. All the functions are available simply by typing the code directly into the edit box (such as link ) - this may be easier.

The toolbar works with Internet Explorer, the Mozilla Suite/SeaMonkey, Firefox, Konqueror, Safari and Opera.

For example: To turn a piece of text into an internal link, select it and press the third button.

In Mozilla browsers and IE, you can format existing text by highlighting the text you want to format and clicking the relevant button on the toolbar. If you click a button without selecting any text, sample text will be inserted at the cursor's position (like so: Bold text). In other browsers, clicking on the button presents an explanation for that feature. (Pre-release 9.0 versions of Opera browser also seem to support the advanced functionality.)

All of the toolbar options, and further editing options, are available in Bananeweizen's Firefox extension.

List of functions
(apart from the last two examples, these pieces of wikitext are created by typing abc, selecting it and clicking the buttons on the toolbar) {| class="wikitable" ! Icon !! Function !! What it shows when editing !! What it shows on the page
 * - bgcolor="#efefef"
 * [[Image:Bold icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Bold or strong emphasis
 * align="center"| abc
 * align="center"|abc
 * [[Image:Italic icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Italic or emphasis
 * align="center"| abc
 * align="center"|abc
 * [[Image:Internal link icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Internal link
 * align="center"| abc
 * align="center"|abc
 * [[Image:External link icon.png]]
 * align="center"|External link
 * align="center"| [abc.com]
 * [[Image:Headline icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Section heading
 * align="center"| == abc ==
 * align="center"| [abc.com]
 * [[Image:Headline icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Section heading
 * align="center"| == abc ==
 * align="center"|Section heading
 * align="center"| == abc ==

abc

 * [[Image:Image icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Insert image
 * align="center"| [[Image:Glory Day celebration of the Poumai Naga.jpg]]
 * align="center"|[[Image:Glory Day celebration of the Poumai Naga.jpg|80px]]
 * [[Image:Media icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Insert media
 * align="center"| [[Media:abc.ogg]]
 * align="center"|[[Media:abc.ogg]]
 * [[Image:Math icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Mathematical formula
 * align="center"| $$abc$$
 * align="center"|$$abc$$
 * [[Image:Nowiki icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Ignore wiki formatting
 * align="center"| abc Bold text
 * align="center"| abc Bold text
 * [[Image:Signature icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Sign talk comments (with time stamp)
 * align="center"| --~
 * align="center"|--Gareth Aus 22:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * [[Image:H-line icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Horizontal line
 * align="center"|
 * align="center"| --~
 * align="center"|--Gareth Aus 22:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * [[Image:H-line icon.png]]
 * align="center"|Horizontal line
 * align="center"|
 * align="center"|


 * }

New on the English Wikipedia: create redirect page.

John P. Meier
I answered your question on my talk page with some page numbers, then went back and corrected them; sorry if you picked up the first (incorrect) edit. If you have a copy of AMJ handy you might select some quotations (I did my checking at the bookstore); otherwise, I'll add them when I'm next at the main library. Cheers, Michael K. Edwards 00:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Meier and miracles
I have been watching with interest your expansion of John P. Meier. I thought I'd call this quote to your attention, from page 482 of the Biblica 1999 citation: "Not only the global argument but also the probing of all the individual miracle stories and sayings point to a historical Jesus who claimed and was believed by his disciples to have worked miracles during his public ministry." This seems to get the balance of emphasis right, and might be worth using in a summary of this aspect of Meier's work (which he seems to regard as fairly central to his personal contribution to the wider dialogue).

Keep up the good work! Cheers, Michael K. Edwards 23:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

criterion of multiple attestation
I created a new article. I would appreciate your imput and review of it. My biggest concern is that the introduction basically consists of a long quote from Meier. While it is always good to make sure we have the authors views corectly, it seems unencyclopedic to start an article off that way. This problem exists in the criterion of embarrassment article as well. Anyway, tell me what you think.--Andrew c 18:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm going to move this discussion to talk:criterion of multiple attestation, if you don't mind.--Andrew c 22:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Public Choice Theory
Great work on the PCT article. Feel free to remove the cleanup banner when you feel comfortable with it. You've satisfied my reasons for adding it. Morphh 13:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, that's pretty authoritative. Thx, Morphh.  You were right to post the banner, and I wouldn't have been emboldened to act without it.  I may do a bit more on the article, but I'll return the honor of retiring the banner to you.


 * I think that the substance is there, but the article could still use some concision. Wish that there were a banner for that. Maybe there should be.  Or I could at least post this on the PCT Talk page.  BW, Thomasmeeks 11:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Derivative
Hi. I don't understand this edit. Not at all really, and not for lack of mathematics education. Would you please visit talk:Derivative and explain what you mean? Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I think I got it now. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:03, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry. I have been kind of grumpy and inconsiderate. I don't own the derivative article, so please feel free to edit it. I won't interfere with your changes anymore. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Derivative again
Hello. I am not familiar with your use of "represent" as it applies to the derivative. You say "social science apps often use derivative + or - sign to 'represent' empirical-theory relation". I'm not familiar with this use - can you provide a reference to an example of such use? Also, I'm not sure this applies in the sentence in the article: is this use the representation of a property of a function? Also, I removed the wikidictionary link since it didn't point to any specific definition, and I don't think pointing to a definition of "represent" would really help the reader understand this use. Thanks, Doctormatt 18:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Misc.

 * May I respectfully suggest that you review this thread and talk page guidelines.  I was not aware that deleting a Wiki template that I thought no longer applied (and for which I gave a reason) is suppression of a viewpoint.  Thomasmeeks 19:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

In statistics, regression analysis examines the dependence of a random variable, called a dependent variable (response variable, regressor), on other random or deterministic variables, called independent variables (predictors). The mathematical model of their relationship is the regression equation. Well-known types of regression equations are linear regression, the logistic regression for discrete responses (both generalize in the generalized linear model), and nonlinear regression.

In statistics, regression analysis examines the relation of a dependent random variable ((the response variable) to specified independent variables (predictors). The mathematical model of their relationship is the regression equation. Well-known types of regression equations are linear regression and nonlinear regression. Linear regression ranges from ordinary least squares to the generalized linear model, which includes  logistic regression for discrete responses.

Misc.
The social ranking of one pair of distinct social states, say x and y, is different for 2 sets of orderings, say $$R_1$$, ..., $$R_n$$ and $$R_1'$$, ..., $$R_n'$$ with corresponding social orderings R and R' , such that x R y and y R' x.

In economics, wealth refers to assets minus liabilities, whether narrowly or broadly construed.

Your Request Images
Your requested images are finnally ready: Image:Maximum_tangentplane_boxed.png and Image:Maximum_boxed.png according to your instructions. --Freiddy 17:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Smith's definition
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding the Economics article, I strongly feel that the lenghty quote from Smith (1776) does not belong in the introduction. It is of mainly historical interest and disrupts the reader. Much better to put it in a section that specifically deals with the history of economic thought or alternative definitions of Economics. Regards, Ujalm 20:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC).


 * I appreciate your comment, Ujalm, and the way you expressed it. I meant what I said in commending your Edit (in the my Edit summary, which I hope you read closely). It was a careful and well-considered Edit.  Let me be very frank.  Before today the Smith quote was a bit of a snoozer for me too.  At the very time you made your Edit, however, I was trying to fix things with a new sentence preceding the quotation.  Had you (instead of me) have put that new sentence in, I think my reaction before today would have been (after studying the quotation again):  "Smith, you clever dog, you're one of us, just waiting to be rediscovered."  From my perspective (today) I believe that the Smith quotation is of more than historical interest in showing the continuity of the economic perspective.  If you disagree after perusing this (and possibly Smith), please let me know, either here or on the Econ Talk page.  BW & regards, Thomasmeeks 21:37, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Economics is not only a social science but a science, so its practitioners claim. For representing and the testing the theory, it may use mathematical economics and econometrics. Thomasmeeks 02:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

putnam "fact/value dichotomy" http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/PUTCOL.html

Economic language and reasoning
May 1 2004 Economics relies on rigorous styles of argument. Economic methodology has several interacting parts:


 * Collection of economic data. These data consist of measurable values of price and changes in price, for measurable commodities. For example: the cost to hire a worker for a week, or the cost of a particular commodity, and how much is typically used.
 * Formulation of models of economic relationships, for example, the relationship between the general level of prices and the general level of employment. This includes observable forms of economic activity, such as money, consumption, preferences, buying, selling, and prices. Some of the models are simple accounting models, while others postulate specific kinds of economic behaviour, such as utility or profit maximization. An example of a model that illustrates both of these aspects is the classical mathematical formulation of the Keynesian system involving the consumption function and the national income identity. This article will refer to such models as formal models, although they are not formal in the sense of formal logic. Economists often formulate very simple models in order to define the impact of just one variant changing. This is called the "ceteris paribus"-assumption (All others equal), meaning that all other things are assumed not to change during the period of observation. Example: "If the price of movie tickets rises, ceteris paribus the demand for popcorn falls."
 * Production of economic statistics. Taking the data collected, and applying the model being used to produce a representation of economic activity. For example, the "general price level" is a theoretical idea common to macroeconomic models. The specific inflation rate involves taking measurable prices, and a model of how people consume, and calculating what the "general price level" is from the data within the model. For example, suppose that diesel fuel costs 1 euro a litre: To calculate the price level would require a model of how much diesel an average person uses, and what fraction of their income is devoted to this &mdash;but it also requires having a model of how people use diesel, and what other goods they might substitute for it.
 * Reasoning within economic models. This process of reasoning (see the articles on informal logic, logical argument, fallacy) sometimes involves advanced mathematics. For instance, an established (though possibly unexamined) tradition among economists is to reason about economic variables in two-dimensional graphs in which curves representing relations between the axis variables are parameterized by various indices. A good example of this type of reasoning is exhibited by Paul Krugman's online essay, There's something about macro. See also the article IS/LM model. One critical analysis of economic reasoning is studied in Paul Samuelson's treatise, Foundations of Economic Analysis: he identifies a class of assertions called operationally meaningful theorems which are those that can be conceivably refuted by empirical data. As usual in science, the conclusions obtained by reasoning have a predictive as well as confirmative (or dismissive) value. An example of the predictive value of economic theory is a prediction as to the effect of current deficits on interest rates 10 years into the future. An example of the confirmative value of economic theory would be confirmation (or dismissal) of theories concerning the relation between marginal tax rates and the deficit.

Formal modelling, which has been adapted to some extent by all branches of economics, is motivated by general principles of consistency and completeness. It is not identical to what is often referred to as mathematical economics; this includes, but is not limited to, an attempt to set microeconomics, in particular general equilibrium, on solid mathematical foundations. Some reject mathematical economics: The Austrian School of economics believes that anything beyond simple logic is often unnecessary and inappropriate for economic analysis. In fact, the entire empirical-deductive framework sketched in this section may be rejected outright by that school. However, the framework sketched here accurately represents the current predominant view of economics.

Language and reasoning: Save the box?
In Econononics is the following (boxed as a digression):

Advantages of this most recent Edit compared to the previous Edit is that the identity equation (the equation of exchange) is distinguished from its empirical-theory counterpart, the modern quantity theory of money. The question can still be posed as to whether the example is too complicated or too much of a digression?

Request Semi-protection until there is a consensus to remove it. As discussed at Talk:Economics, close to 34 out of the last 100 Editors since March 29, 2007 have been vandals. Thus, close to 68 ((= 2*34) out of last 100 Editors have involved vandalism or reverting vandalism. Almost all vandalism has have been by unregistered users.  From Feb. 16 to March 24, 2007 when semiprotect was in effect, there were no instances of vandalism.  The article used to be a featured article.  It has a better chance of returning to that status if vandalism is stopped. Thanks. --Thomasmeeks 00:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Request Semi-protection until there is a consensus to remove it. Semi-protection was removed prematurely & without Talk page discussion, much less consensus  with the following Edit summaries:
 * 15:40, 23 May 2007 Taxman (rm protected template, not currently a target)
 * 15:39, 23 May 2007 Taxman (Protected Economics: doesn't seem to still be target of massive vandalism [move=sysop] (expires 01:51, June 21, 2007 (UTC)))

Taxman's Contributions history indicates that he did not go through this page to request unprotect. Evidently his Admin status allowed it. The problems with User:Taxman's justification are discussed in today's comment at Talk:Economics.

Here is the earlier protection request and action:
 * Request Semi-protection until there is a consensus to remove it. As discussed at Talk:Economics, close to 34 out of the last 100 Editors since March 29, 2007 have been vandals. Thus, close to 68 ((= 2*34) out of last 100 Editors have involved vandalism or reverting vandalism. Almost all vandalism has have been by unregistered users. From Feb. 16 to March 24, 2007 when semiprotect was in effect, there were no instances of vandalism. The article used to be a featured article. It has a better chance of returning to that status if vandalism is stopped. Thanks. --Thomasmeeks 00:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * (Semi-protected – Steel 01:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC))

--Thomasmeeks 15:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC) (signature added)
 * It's generally nicer to speak to the person in question before rushing around people's talk pages and project pages asking for others to reverse them. – Steel 16:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting oppose.svg Declined, - please discuss with the unprotecting admin, User:Taxman - A l is o n  ☺ 16:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Will do. I was under the impression that administrators were subject to the same process as others for removal of semiprotect and that previous semiprotectors were to be contacted.  I had also thought that discussing removal of semiprotect on a Talk page section for that the subject  (such as the one indicated above) was standard practice, as suggested by one of the templates. Maybe I'm too close to the disruptive effects of vandalism & not-so-good Edits on the progress of the article to be particularly chastened.   --Thomasmeeks 18:19, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Request Semi-protection for as long as allowable. The beginning of the school year coincides with a big jump in the rate of vandalism of the article to a rate similar to last Spring (& Fall 2006 for that matter) before semi-protection was granted. Of the last 100 Edits, 36 were vandalism (deleting significant amounts of material without explanation, only degrading spelling, personal messages, etc.). Thus, more than 70 percent of Edits were for vandalism or reverting vandalism. All of the vandalism was done by newly registered or unregistered users. By eliminating that source of disruption, semi-protect I believe would hasten the improvement of the article. My thanks. --Thomasmeeks 13:03, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting support.svg Semi-protected - I can't semi-protect preventivly per WP:PROTECT. On the other hand there has been a fair amount of vandalism I have semi-pd it for a week. - Тhε Rαnδom Eδιτor 23:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I believe that the answer above is referring to preemptive semi-protect. Protection policy says that:
 * Semi-protection should not be used: As a preemptive measure against vandalism before any vandalism has occurred. (Emph. added)
 * But the above request referred to heavy recent vandalism. Maybe I am missing something. Is there any help on clarification?  --Thomasmeeks 01:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello again, TRE. A bit more. For the above, I did review the most recent 100 Edits of Economics to tabulate the number of vandalous Edits (and yes, that was time-consuming). Those Edits occurred from Sept. 6 to Sept. 25. That is a fair amount of time to sample. As noted the vandalism rate was consistent with rates described in earlier requests for semi-protect in Spring 2006. So, there does seem to be a persistent pattern, both recent and earlier. I agree with not preempting vandalism, that is, trying to stop vandalism before there is any pattern of it. But wouldn't you agree that that is different from stopping the an observable pattern of vandalism that has occurred? Otherwise, what would be the point of semi-protect? If you agree, wouldn't you consider extending the semi-protect more in line with the patteern of vandalism for that article? Last time it was granted, that was for 40 days. 2 months before then, it was for 45 days. Thank you for any help that you can provide. --Thomasmeeks 11:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for replying. I do not know if you had to a chance to read all the way through the 11:26, 26 September 2007 Edit above. In any case I regret that I was not explicit enough.  In your 23:27, 25 September 2007 Economics Edit is this summary:
 * Protected Economics: Vandalism [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed] (expires 23:27, 2 October 2007}
 * This comes to 1 week of semi-protecton. My Edit immediately above was as to whether semi-protect could be extended beyond 1 week in line with earlier semi-protects and in line with the probable recurrence of vandalism.  The situation would be different if vandalism was not a recurring feature of Economics.  I believe that allowing such disruption reduces participation in the effort to clean up the article.   Thank you for your help.  --19:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Request Semi-protection for 60 days. Of the last Edits over a 21-day period from Oct. 14, 26 were vandalism (deleting significant amounts of material without explanation, only degrading spelling, personal messages, etc.). This continues earlier patterns for the article. Almost all of the vandalism was done by newly registered or unregistered users. By eliminating that source of disruption, semi-protect I believe would hasten the improvement of the article. My thanks. --Thomasmeeks 16:03, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Break
Since at least the 1960s, macroeconomics has been characterized by further integration of micro-based modeling of sectors, including rationality of players, efficient use of market information, and imperfect competition,Ng, 1992 This has addressed a long-standing concern about inconsistent developments of the same subject. . Analysis of long-term determinants of national income across countries has also greatly expanded.

The vast majority of economic theory is in terms of either macro or micro economics. However, a few authors argue that 'mesoeconomics', which considers the intermediate level of economic organization such as markets and other institutional arrangements, should be considered an additional branch of economic study.

Mamalakis claims that mesoeconomics "unifies and reconciles the macro and micro approaches and is a "richer" way of studying the dynamics of economics than the two traditional models.

(for example, Kurt Dopfer, Stuart Holland and Markos Mamalakis)

For ease of reference, here is a log from the article history tab of 16 consecutive recent Economics edits by User:Wikidea with repeated material of each log entry omitted except for the latest edit.
 * (cur) (last) 01:59 Wikidea (69,700 bytes) (→Economic analysis of law - erred on section heading weight again, sorry)
 * 01:57 (69,699 bytes) (→Economic fields - added economic analysis of law)
 * 01:53 (66,566 bytes) (→Econometrics)
 * 01:44 (66,566 bytes) (changed more headings - now they're just a bit more uniform, and presentable)
 * 01:42 (66,573 bytes) (→Language and reasoning - got rid of superfluous box)
 * 01:41 (66,664 bytes) (→Criticism and contrarian perspectives - changed headings slightly)
 * 01:38 (66,679 bytes) (→Criticisms of economic theory and practice - deleted sub sub headings)
 * 01:34 (66,894 bytes) (→See also - reordered with multicol templates, and deleted some of the links that already appear in article body)
 * 01:30 (67,233 bytes) (Changed substantially areas of study; proper sub headings; only deletion was the extra text on heterodox economics. Copy added labour and game theory. Please see talk.)
 * 01:11 (65,790 bytes) (sorry, didn't do sub-headings correctly, fixed that. On principle, all sections and subsections should have main article links.)
 * 01:09 (65,780 bytes) (→Schools of thought - reordered according to chronology; merged "mainstream" with neo-classical and deleted section on heterodoxy. These two are useful categories, but don't go into enough depth)
 * 00:51 (66,161 bytes) (→Core concepts - cleaned section with pictures on right and main article links at top)
 * 00:47 (66,235 bytes) (removed wikimedia links from top, because they belong at bottom and are there already; portal too)
 * 00:30 Wikidea (66,308 bytes) (Moved core concepts up page, because this is material which readers need to be introduced to at the start)
 * 00:24 (66,327 bytes) (moved schools of thought up the page to go next to history)
 * 00:13 (66,454 bytes) (merged development of idea section with history of economics because both main pages are the same)

Protection policy
The following has benefitted from comments of Steel, though he is not responsible for remaining deficiencies.

1st paragraph: CURRENT version (with sentences numbered for ease of comparison and reference):
 * (1) With the exception of any pages tagged with the office or reset templates, any admin may unprotect any page after a reasonable period has lapsed, particularly if there is no discussion on the talk page.
 * (2) However, unless consensus has been reached, pages should not be unprotected soon after protection without prior consultation with the admin who first protected the page.
 * (3) This is particularly important in the case of controversial pages, where the conflict may start up again and the protecting admin may be in touch with the disputants.

Provisional PROPOSED alternative:
 * (1a) Anyone may request unprotection through Requests for page protection or discuss it on the article Talk page. Any admin may unprotect any page (except for pages tagged with the office or reset templates) provided a reasonable period has elapsed.
 * (2a) For non-WP:RPP action, admins should factor in visible Talk-page section discussion as to (un)protection.
 * (3a) This includes the case of controversial pages, where conflict may be renewed with unprotection.

Purpose: to clarify, simplify, and guide admins and non-admins.

Rationales for proposed alternative:
 * It is written for non-admins (as well as admins), & not just as an afterthought.
 * Non-admins are more alerted to put there (un)protect concerns on the Talk page, so an admin can factor in those concerns.
 * Admins are busy people. The end of (3) is too special, roundabout, & uncertain to warrant mention.
 * It reflects the current paragraph.

Other advantages of proposed alternative:
 * There no added admin burden whatever at WP:RPP.
 * (2a) only states clearly what a prudent admin would be doing anyhow.
 * Non-admins are more directly informed of what they need to do to make it easier for admins to decide on unprotect.

A 2-day call for comment is requested before submission (although nothing prevents any changes in the current article section before then). One possibility is listing consecutive amendments below (1b, 1c, etc.).

OK. I note that the 2nd paragraph of the lead refers only Requests for page protection as a means of (un)protect, whereas the Unprotection section concentrates on admins.


 * WP:WPVS (rate & sources of WP:VANDALism) /* See also */ rate & sources of WP:VANDALism: update of relevant heading link to article

Citation style
Hello, are you especially attached to this kind of citation style with ASCII bullets, references which contain multiple citations, inline links and so on? While working on the standardisation of cite journal usage, I'm often encountering economics articles whose references are such a jungle that I have no idea how to deal with it. They're also often full of ten years old URLs which are broken now. Is it a problem to redo such references from scratch? Or do you know someone who understands this peculiar citation style and can perform some cleanups on it? Thanks for the help, Nemo 09:55, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Thanks for creating John McCormack (journalist).

User:Willbb234 while examining this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Willbb234Talk (please &#123;&#123;ping&#125;&#125; me in replies) 21:14, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm all for it & tried to indicate such in the Edit summary for the WP page: "Creating John McCormack (journalist) [as] stub"
 * I'm all for it & tried to indicate such in the Edit summary for the WP page: "Creating John McCormack (journalist) [as] stub"


 * -- Thomasmeeks (talk) 00:35, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Edward Lazear
Thank you, Spencer. Will do.

Thomasmeeks (talk) 22:56, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of History of the Jews and Judaism in the Land of IsraelRoman era (64 BCE – 324 CE)
Hello Thomasmeeks,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged History of the Jews and Judaism in the Land of IsraelRoman era (64 BCE – 324 CE) for deletion in response to your request.

If you didn't intend to make such a request and don't want the article to be deleted, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit edit the page] and remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

John B123 (talk) 21:08, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi!
Nice to "meet" you! T. E. Meeks (talk) 11:23, 23 March 2021 (UTC) (talk) 11:21, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

11:21, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Salamanders
You added a statement that salamanders lack hearts to the article, with a reference to the Wall Street Journal that I can't access. I believe this is incorrect and that all amphibians have hearts, see Amphibian. Can you quote the relevant sentence you found in the source article? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you your inquiry. Regrettably, I badly misread the book-review article in that respect.  Thank you for catching the mistake.  Thomasmeeks (talk)

Disambiguation link notification for January 15
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Commodity, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Principles of Economics.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 4
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Linwood Holton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George Allen.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Ways to improve How Not To Die: Discover the Foods Scientifically Proven to Prevent and Reverse Disease
Hello, Thomasmeeks,

Thank you for creating How Not To Die: Discover the Foods Scientifically Proven to Prevent and Reverse Disease.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

"This article needs more material and references. NBOOKS applies."

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with. Remember to sign your reply with. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru (talk) 07:41, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of How Not To Die: Discover the Foods Scientifically Proven to Prevent and Reverse Disease
Hello, Thomasmeeks,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Dr vulpes, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged How Not To Die: Discover the Foods Scientifically Proven to Prevent and Reverse Disease for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative. Also, you may want to consider working on future articles in draft space first, where they cannot be deleted for lacking content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion] but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

 Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 03:16, 9 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello, Dr. V.
 * My reply on Speedy Deletion is on Wiki Talk page for the respective entry.
 * I see that you have a Wiki interest on plants. Happily, Dr. Greger's book is about the life-extending effects of a plant-based diet. The 3rd chapter is titled "How Not to Die from Brain Diseases", right up your alley.
 * The book has 42 pp. of notes supporting a plant-based diet. An amazing book. Used copies available for a song.
 * Cheers, Thomasmeeks (talk) 22:15, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of How Not To Die: Discover the Foods Scientifically Proven to Prevent and Reverse Disease
Hello, Thomasmeeks

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged How Not To Die: Discover the Foods Scientifically Proven to Prevent and Reverse Disease for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:How_Not_To_Die:_Discover_the_Foods_Scientifically_Proven_to_Prevent_and_Reverse_Disease&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

 Dr vulpes  (💬 • 📝) 05:03, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

April 2023
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Stephen King, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 14:16, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding your edits to Stephen King, please use the preview button before you save your edit; this helps you find any errors you have made and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history, as well as helping prevent edit conflicts. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the article will look like without actually saving it.

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. Sundayclose (talk) 14:17, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)