Talk:Yale Economic Review

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If other editors of this article do not object, I would like to place the following tag on it:

 This article or section is written like an advertisement.
Please help rewrite this article from a neutral point of view.
Mark blatant advertising which would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic for speedy deletion, using {{db-spam}}. (December 2007)

v = 0 01:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Response

See the TSSI talk page for an explanation, including an exposition of the differences between the Yale Economic Review and the proposed venture called Critique of Political Economy (COPE).

Watchdog07 Watchdog07 (talk · contribs)

[edit] Objection

I object to the proposal to put an advertisement tag on this article, a proposal which AKliman (aka v=o; aka the antichrist) made without explanation. If Andrew Kliman is genuinely committed to pluralism_in_economics then he will IMMEDIATELY withdraw his proposal.

Watchdog07 Watchdog07 (talk · contribs)


[edit] No Objecton from Editors

Given that editors of this article (there's no record of "Watchdog07" having edited the article) haven't objected to the "advertisement" warning in more than a week, I've placed it in thr article.

I am a Wikipedia editor and I objected. One doesn't have to be an editor of a particular article to object. I think it is absolutely disgraceful that a so-called proponent of "pluralism in economics" would take such an action against the undergraduate economic students of Yale University -- without even bothering to explain on this page why he wanted to place the tag on the article. He didn't even attempt to give an argument. With this action and his tagging of URPE on the Pluralism in economics article he has revealed what a "pluralist" he is. His actions against pluralism will be noted and remembered outside of Wikipedia. Watchdog07 Watchdog07 (talk · contribs)

justice-thunders-condemnation 21:29, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks, JoshuaZ!

Thanks, JoshuaZ, for rewriting the YER article so that it doesn't read like an advertisement.

Nice going!

I'm happy with the removal of the warning tag now that the article has been made neutral.

This is a true example of COLLABORATION AND CONSENSUS in the Wikipedia spirit!

I'll be happy to have Watchdog07 broadcast this VICTORY FOR PLURALISM far and wide outside of Wikipedia.

There now seems to be a language problem or words missing or somethnig from the first sentence of the article.

justice-thunders-condemnation 04:22, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


I'm happy that JoshuaZ saw Andrew Kliman's threat against the Yale Economic Review article for what it was. I'm happy that someone else stepped in and overturned Akliman's action. I'm unhappy that Andrew Kliman took his action to begin with. To call what happened a "true example of COLLABORATION AND CONSENSUS", is comical since Andrew Kliman NEVER addressed the concerns of this editor on this page. He NEVER showed on this page the slightest concern for collaboration. That was extremely disrespectful to this editor, to the students of Yale University, and to everyone who is a GENUINE supporter of the movement for pluralism in economics. I hope AKliman has learned a lesson from (what most be) a very humiliating experience for him. Watchdog07 Watchdog07 (talk · contribs)


Dear Watchdog,
I am DELIGHTED with the fact that JoshuaZ fixed the problems that I called attention to when I placed the "advertising" warning tag in the article.
You have been warned on numerous occasions not to make personal attacks on other editors, in violation of the policy WP:NPA. In light of the above personal attack, I warn you again.
Thanks in advance for understanding the need for this warning. I'm sure you will behave properly in the future. Thank you. justice-thunders-condemnation 14:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
What "personal attack"? If you think there was a personal attack, then you need to explain what you think that was before issuing a "warning". The only "attacks" that I can see on this page are the attacks by Andrew J. Kliman, Professor of Economics at Pace University, against the Yale Economic Review and the attacks which he made against myself including his claim that my objection did not count as an objection. Both of those attacks were effectively rebutted by JoshuaZ. Watchdog07 Watchdog07 (talk · contribs)
This is not the place to detail the personal attacks contained in Watchdog07's paragraph, above, that begins "I'm happy that JoshuaZ ...." I will detail them on my talk page.
I dispute that what he claims were "personal attacks" were personal attacks. They were not. I will not reply on his talk page since he has asked me not to put messages on his talk page. Although I respect that request, I was compelled by Wikipedia policy to place a tag on his talk page the other day. I will say, though, that HIS TALK PAGE IS FILLED WITH PERSONAL ATTACKS AGAINST ME - AS WELL AS FALSE CLAIMS - AND I DEMAND THAT HE IMMEDIATELY DELETE IT. Watchdog07 Watchdog07 (talk · contribs)

justice-thunders-condemnation 20:02, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Fall 2006 Cover.jpg

Image:Fall 2006 Cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:08, 27 October 2007 (UTC)