Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Useful work growth theory

Summary/recap sections.
Phmoreno created the "Recap" section listing what he sees as "evidence" that the article should be kept. Not only is this highly irregular, I haven't seen that in an AfD before, but he then added the statement that this section is not for discussion, and removes any text trying to point out that most of his "evidence" in fact does not support the notability at all.

In my opinion, that section should be removed. If not, he must stop removing objective and relevant information about why his links do not support the articles notability. If he refuses to remove the section, or continues to remove the information of why the links do not support his standpoint, I will bring this up on AN/I. --OpenFuture (talk) 20:45, 17 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Your comments amount to spam. When the first electronic spam appeared in the pre-internet, people would reply SPAM SPAM, SPAM, etc. (whole page).  That's all you have done in your continually trying to detract from the facts.Phmoreno (talk) 15:36, 20 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment on content, not on the contributor. --OpenFuture (talk) 17:25, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I am a researcher at the University of Toulouse 1, Capitole and an associate member of the Toulouse School of Economics. I would be in favor of undeleting the article Useful work growth theory for the following reasons.

1) I am working on the model. I gave a talk on the model at eem12, and I am working on refinements of the model with Robert Ayres.  I also gave a talk on the model in September 2012 for The Shift Project.

2) Including energy and useful work in economic production models is of interest to many people. For example Reiner Kümmel recently published a book on the subject and delivered a talk on the subject at the ASPO 2012 conference in Vienna.

3) Current economic phenomena support the thesis of the model.  We are experiencing slowing economic production with slowing energy production.  A consequence of any economic production model including energy is that peak oil is not a problem about high oil prices as most economists assume, but rather a problem of low oil prices.  That is to say that rising energy prices produce recessions thus depressing prices below marginal production prices, thus reducing production.  The theory may not be mainstream today, but in my opinion it will be mainstream within 5 years.

ischindl 20:33 23 October 2012 —Preceding undated comment added 18:37, 23 October 2012 (UTC)