User talk:Mikcob
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Interest (economics)
Hello Mikcob, how about we redirect Interest (economics) to Interest? The new article is quite short. Shawnc 17:08, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] I will combine some terms and link /redirect to them
I will: edit the "returns disambiguation" page to provide a link to "returns (economics)" a new page with the terms interest, wages, and rent (returns to the classical economics "factors of production"). I will make redirects for these terms. Is that OK??
I will also install a link on the "interest" page.
--The Trucker 18:04, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Economic Rent (political economy)
Thank you for considering my opinion on this article. I believe that two things would do much to improve it:
A) A 3rd person perspective throughout. Currently the format is that of a persuasive essay, as though it is trying to convince the reader to adopt certain beliefs. Once it is stated who holds these beliefs and, in necessary cases, widely-held opposing beliefs are added, I believe the article will be an excellent addition to Wikipedia.
B) Where this article contradicts the other article on Political Economy, the article should state who it is who holds these beliefs, rather than implying the other article is wrong from an objective/factual point of view. If that were to be the case, than the other article should be edited until it is satisfactory. This is something of an important sub-goal of point A.
I hope that my suggestions can be of some use, and please feel free to contact me if there is something you disagree with or would like me to clarify. A.Z. 01:00, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Mikcob:Article
Hey, relax. Personal sandboxes should be created in userspace. I've moved it to User:Mikcob/Article. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] term political economy
until it is cited, i think it has to stay the same. the physiocrats certainly have strong relations to the term and as i recall they used something very much like it only french. i'm pretty sure that smith was not the first to use the term, so if you want to move it back to yours you'll need to find some citations.--Buridan 12:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
sure thing...
- The first use of the term is said to have been Antoine de Montchretien in his "Treatise on Political Economy" (Traité de l'economie politique), published in Rouen, France, 1615.
From The science of political economy, henry george, p 67. 1898 ...
Note.. a french physiocrat... before adam smith... have a great day. --Buridan 20:27, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
- Note, i did not want you to cite non-exitence, i wanted you to cite someone that ascribed it to smith, who was inarguably a popularizer. as for your claiming that i was authoritarian, no, i was just requiring you to provide a citation that would justify changing the current bit that you were changing that i happened to recall was correct. since the original author thought it was correct, and i thought it was correct, i thought you needed to support your position. You were entirely right in questioning my position. the citation above hopefully solve the issue. have a great day. Also when you cite things, try to use scholar.google.com or books.google.com please. --Buridan 21:07, 24 July 2007 (UTC)