User talk:Msrasnw/2008

Welcome[edit]

More "officially," Welcome! At this point, you're a Wiki veteran, but you might find the following handy as a reference.

Hello, Msrasnw/2008, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Thomasmeeks (talk) 00:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agricultural econ[edit]

If it is not too presumptuous to say so, your add of the above is welcome. It is the only field in the Britannca Econ article (Macro) on contemporary econ fields not previously represented by a subsection or at least discussion in Economics. BW, Thomasmeeks (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC) P.S. Would you be able to supply a page-specific reference for the citation you give there? Thxnks. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 16:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Thomas, presumption should not be a fear to you, here anyway. Thanks for writing. The whole wikipedia seems an exciting and more properly academic exercise than many say. I am still a bit unhappy with Dev Econ and Growth together but this is how things seem to be going in my department too as the mainstream expands even further its power inside economics and drives interesting bits into other departments! Anyway - the graph still seems not show anything very clearly? Loads of exams to mark now (Dev Econ and Bus. Econ) but I'll try and get the p. refs for Ag Econ soon and add perhaps add the Palgrave entry too. I have a palgrave but not a Britanica Econ (is it Free online - I only found a log-in screen that seemed to what one to join?). My next plan is a hopefully interesting entry on "applied economics" - which I've to do some lectures on. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 17:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Well, I have acknowledged that pairing of DE & GE is a matter of heuristic convenience, not principle. I think that both are very important (as the sainted founder of econ suggested). I like to think that the eager newcomer in seeing the pairing will say "Wow," to the benefit of both fields. I certainly don't think that the pairing works to the disadvantage of DE. The Figure needs to be sourced (I'll write the author, if s/he is traceable). The darn thing requires use of the Thumb button to enlarge it for full comprehension, but its content anyhow notes the enormous disparities across continents and over time, whatever the deficiencies and insufficiecies in output measures. Good, on Palgrave. (A more recent survey article is B. L. Gardner (2001), "Agriculture, Economics of," International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, v. 1, pp. 337-344 (abstract). The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics (2008) can't come out too soon.) On Brittanica, your (even public) library may well have off-sited full online access, as distinct from the online snippets available without subscription. A quick reaction on "applied econ," if you can find one or more authoritive and comprehensive survey articles on the subject, that would be promising. Otherwise, arguably not (because "applied econ" is so comprehensive, diffuse, or ill-defined, running throughout econ). Lacking such a source, it's still a good descriptive term, but may be less promising as an encyclopedia entry. BW, Thomasmeeks (talk) 00:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kaldor's growth laws[edit]

Hi- I was new page patrolling, I check newly created pages and help them out if I can. Sorry if my comment seemed unkind; I just get pretty amazed when people take these sort of obvious things and claim them as their own theories. Of course, the egg of Columbus springs to mind... J Milburn (talk) 17:39, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PPF[edit]

Agrred on the slope. I wowte the originntor of the fugure but have not heard back yet. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 20:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lucas' Law[edit]

I have come across a page on Lucas' Law and not having heard of it before I had quick look on the web and in other references and have been unable to find anything about Spencer Lucas and this Law and the page is unreferenced and it all seems a bit odd. How should one proceed in such a situation? I think what I really want to do is ask a specialist to have a look at it. How do I do this? (Msrasnw (talk) 13:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Since it is totally unreferenced, I suggest you put a {{prod}} template on it and notify the author. Please follow the instructions at the template page and those on the template. Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 13:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning your inquiry on my page, I agree with the above. My quick check of http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22+Lucas%27+law%22++&hl=en&lr=&start=20&sa=N & http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Lucas%27+Extension%22&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search raises questions. It depends on what you think is warranted. If there is sufficient WP:VER attestation, well & good. Otherwise, it might be a candidate for consideration under Wikipedia:Deletion policy. Someone could well have heard a lecture in which the term was used of a Lucas paper or seen the term in a published paper, but that by itself might not be sufficient to survive a review process. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 16:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PPF[edit]

Agrred on the slope. I wrote the originntor of the figure but have not heard back yet. Thx. --Thomasmeeks (talk) 21:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Lobo (The King of Currumpaw)[edit]

I have nominated Lobo (The King of Currumpaw), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lobo (The King of Currumpaw). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. asenine ^t/_c 13:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Korea![edit]

Thank you for your recent contributions to Irworobongdo. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Korea? It's a group dedicated to improving the overall quality of all Korea-related articles. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! Caspian blue 22:50, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. As for the article, I would want to nominate it to T:TDYK because the subject is interesting and notable if it has more contents. --Caspian blue 23:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article looks good with the divisions with the specific subheaders and I like your edits although a reviewer at DYK requires more in-line sourcing from the article. Could you take a look at WP:CITE for reference? Thanks--Caspian blue 17:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you're the author of Yun Sim-deok! The Irworobongdo is ready to be presented for DYK as it is. You did the good job.--Caspian blue 00:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Irworobongdo[edit]

On 23 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Irworobongdo, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--R0pe-196 (talk) 15:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. Thank you for the visit. I have had a good time working with you as acknowledging the screen in detail at the same time. I hope you write such good article soon. Best wishes.--Caspian blue 15:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hwanbyeokdang and image permission[edit]

Hi, Msrasnw. Thank you for uploading the image of Hwanbyeokdang, but could you forward your permission email from the photographer to OTRS team ( permissions-commons@wikimedia.org ) and read WP:OTRS policy? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:OTRS Because even if you got the permission, unless they have "OTRS" confirmation, any image could be deleted by admins on Commons. So please read the guideline and follow it. Thanks.--Caspian blue 19:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great! You forwarded your mail to OTRS! By the way, if possible, could you get a permission to upload a bigger size of the image? Also the article is nominated to T:TDYK. --Caspian blue 17:04, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Applied economics[edit]

Nice job on the article so far. Just a quick note; inline citations are to be placed at the very end of the information they reference, not just after the author of the information. Gary King (talk) 01:05, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should also consider submitting the article as a Did You Know? article; it already meets the minimum length requirement of 1500 characters, and as long as it's less than five days old, then it can be nominated. Gary King (talk) 01:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that sounds good. Gary King (talk) 01:16, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]