Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Garrett relation

Concerning the deletion of the "Garrett relation" article, what would need to change to make it meet the Wikipedia guidelines?

The comments suggest that the post is original research, which is false. C.f. the 7 first (of many more) links provided as source:

1) Garrett, Timothy J. (2011-02-01). "Are there basic physical constraints on future anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide?". Climatic Change. 104 (3): 437–455. arXiv:0811.1855. doi:10.1007/s10584-009-9717-9. ISSN 1573-1480. 2) Garrett, T. J. (2012-01-05). "No way out? The double-bind in seeking global prosperity alongside mitigated climate change". Earth System Dynamics. 3 (1): 1–17. Bibcode:2012ESD.....3....1G. doi:10.5194/esd-3-1-2012. ISSN 2190-4979. 3) Garrett (2011). "How persistent is civilization growth?". arXiv:1101.5635v1 [physics.soc-ph]. 4) Maddison, Angus (2007). The world economy volume 1: A millennial perspective volume 2: Historical statistics. Academic Foundation. 5)Garrett, Timothy J. (2014). "Long-run evolution of the global economy: 1. Physical basis". Earth's Future. 2 (3): 127–151. arXiv:1306.3554. Bibcode:2014EaFut...2..127G. doi:10.1002/2013EF000171. ISSN 2328-4277. 6) "The long run evolution of the global economy - Part 2: Hindcasts of Innovation and growth" (PDF). www.earth-syst-dynam.net. Retrieved 2019-01-17. 7) Nolthenius, Richard (March 2018). "Civilization as a Thermodynamic System: Connecting Energy and Economics" (PDF).

Sure some links are faulty and would require updating, yet the research is peer-reviewed and making its way to economics. C.f. for example the following paper that cites Tim Garrett:

"Economics for the future – Beyond the superorganism" https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106520 by Nathan J. Hagens https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800919310067#bib0210

Correlation does not imply causation, yet many hints suggest that GDP is unfortunately facilitated by energy, c.f. in particular the paper above (and more sources cited in that paper) but also discussed at length in Tim Garrett's papers.

Tim Garrett is also working together with Steve Keen, an economist working on energy, for more interdisciplinary, c.f.: https://www.patreon.com/posts/model-start-to-26875256

This partnership also led Steve Keen to coin the following quote: "Labour without energy is a corpse; capital without energy is a sculpture."

Economics touches numerous fields, in particular climate change these days (mostly via the energy channel). Interdisciplinary is thus a necessity and could shed light on blind spots that the discipline of economics may have. Energy is one such blind spot Tim Garrett's work helped uncover. In that sense, the Wikipedia page was a very helpful resource. (I noticed the deletion of the page no less than 15 days later as I refer to it regularly.)

It is also discussed that the article is self-promotion, which I disagree with in the same way that I do not see the Euler's formula as being a self-promotion of Euler. Or a more recent example, the Keeling curve.

If the name is the issue, I'm sure one could work toward finding an alternative naming. In any case, I am willing to help resolve any issues.

Best, Gordonschuecker (talk) 00:37, 15 August 2020 (UTC) mathematician and economist.


 * There are no changes that could possibly make the page meet WP guidelines. The problem is with the topic itself, not its coverage here. It is non-notable research, it is a fringe theory, having an article dedicated to it gives it undue weight. And it's bad pop science, which I suspect is the main reason why people might feel interested in this page. By the way, Steve Keen is also very much outside the scientific consensus on these questions. But this isn't even a question that matters, because again, this model is non-notable (and hilariously wrong). Seirl (talk)
 * Ah, and I should also mention that the Ecological Economics journal is also generally publishing very heterodox stuff outside the scientific consensus, and that Richard Nolthenius is not an economist, as explained in my deletion request. Seirl (talk) 20:19, 25 August 2020 (UTC)