Category talk:Economists

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Don't you think that the names should be categorised by SURNAME, not FIRST NAME? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 21:19, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

---

Why are there no entries after T? Wicksell and Young are categorised as economists but do not appear!

[edit] Subcategories

The number of economists is too much to lump them all into the "Economists" category. A lot have been classified by nationality, but a lot haven't. Is the goal to put them all into a nationality category? What about Daron Acemoglu, for example—is he a Turkish economist or an American economist? Furthermore, I can see Category:American economists needing to be broken into subcategories itself. It might make more sense to classify them by specialty, but that will involve a lot more judgment calls. Any thoughts? I am willing to do the work of sorting out these entries, but wonder if anyone has any thoughts first. Afelton 14:36, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

I have created Category:Classical economists as a start, but in doing this I noticed that many people (e.g. David Ricardo and John Stuart Mill were only listed as "British" or "English" economists respectively - meaning that they did not appear on Category:Economists (I have now added them to the category). This (putting someone in a subcategory but not the main category) often happens and isn't helpful. May I suggest (on the subject of overcrowding) that someone creates a system that has a Table of Contents by letter (like in List of political parties) so that it is easier to navigate. Tamino 07:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] badly needed revision

I think more important than an economists nationality is their area of contribution and philosophical alignment with perhaps contending but widely accepted schools of thought.

Here are some suggestions for categories: Keynesians, Anti-Keynesians, Architects of the Capital Asset Pricing Model, Behavioral Economists, International Trade Specialists, Evolutionary Economists, "Theoretical" Economists -- developers of game theory, for instance.

Sounds good, although I'm sure there will be arguments about who belongs in what category! That's fine, though, and I think much more useful information than nationality. Afelton 19:33, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree. National categories can stay but "area" categories would certainly be useful (see my post above in Subcategories). Tamino 07:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)