Policsn'stuff
Now, I want to know what possibly are your excuses for deleting entries about most recent and relevant critical books by prominent Austrian economists. This is a web site pretending for impartial information and all relevant facts should be welcomed, not deleted.
This is why I will not only rework the part with critical publications by adding some very recent facts about the revolt against Keynesian distortions of real economics science including Tea Party creation and manifesto, but also the challenge to Paul Krugman for a public debate on Austrian vs. Keynesian economics (2010) by Rober P. Murphy and quote pages from Meltdown and Rollback by Tomas E. Woods Jr. Expect also new part entiteled Resurgence of the Opposition to Keynesian Economics shortly not just on this place in Wikipedia.
You are free to create and sponsor a different web site to worship your idol Keynes, but as long as Wikipedia claims to be objective and impartial source of information you will find it increasingly difficult to hide the truth and keep brainwashing of the youth searching for knowledge.
The debate on this page and similar on this site has just started. I'm stronger because the truth is on my side while you will be the inevitavble loser just as the communists were back in the 90s. Lewis is right, The General Theory belongs next to Das Kapital, Revolution and State, and Mao's quotes. An Wiklipedia readers has the solemn right to find it.
- You have a funny way of saying thank you that's for sure. I'm just kidding, but seriously, you're making a lot of assumptions right off the bat, Keynes is not my idol, I have nothing against the Austrian school, I kind of love Hayek actually, and I'm certainly no communist. Why not relax, be civil, and have a peaceful discussion on the appropriate talk page about adding the material you want included? Obviously you feel strongly about this issue, but sometimes very strong feelings can be harmful rather than helpful when editing, remember WP strive for a neutral point of view. I, and several other editors, deleted your additions because they did not follow WP guidelines for content, these are specified in the edit summary and if you take time to look at the corresponding articles for adding content I'm sure you'll see why the information was not up to the standards as it was submitted. Anyway, no ill will, in fact I hope you really enjoy editing WP, but maybe try not to be so quick to jump on people.Policsn'stuff (talk) 04:03, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Welcome! edit
Hello, Policsn'stuff, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.
- Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
- Check out some of these pages:
- Introduction to Wikipedia | Tutorial
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode
- If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out Wikipedia:Questions, stop by and/or ask a question at the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! FeydHuxtable (talk) 21:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- Do a search on Google or your preferred search engine for the subject of the Wikipedia article that you want to create a citation for.
- Find a website that supports the claim you are trying to find a citation for.
- In a new tab/window, go to the citation generator, click on the 'An arbitrary website' bubble, and fill out as many fields as you can about the website you just found.
- Click the 'Get reference wiki text' button.
- Highlight, and then copy (Ctrl+C or Apple+C), the resulting text (it will be something like
<ref> {{cite web | .... }}</ref>, copy the whole thing). - In the Wikipedia article, after the claim you found a citation for, paste (Ctrl+V or Apple+V) the text you copied.
- If the article does not have a References or Notes section (or the like), add this to the bottom of the page, but above the External Links section and the categories:
==References==
{{Reflist}}
- We dont have to many editors who are interested in politics and econ. I very much hope you enjoy editing here! If you need help with anything I especially recommend the tea house per the link above, as there's lots of good friendly editors there. FeydHuxtable (talk) 21:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks so much for the warm welcome (and the fruit ;P)! I'm trying to familiarize myself with Wikipedia protocols as quickly as possible to contribute to the project in a positive way so, once again, thanks for the resources. I hope my interest in political science, economics, and political philosophy can be put to good use. For me the Wikipedia project offers an unexpected benefit, one I'm sure many other editors share, it provides a place where I can use the knowledge I've gained to provide a reliable reference for others, but also sparks me to continue to learn more about the subjects I'm passionate about, a very nice by-product! I'm already loving the supportiveness, and integrity of the community and look forward to helping make Wikipedia a better reference. Policsn'stuff (talk) 04:21, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Merry Christmas! edit
WikiWomen's Collaborative: Come join us (and check out our new website)! edit
| WikiWomen - We need you! | |
|---|---|
 |
Hi Policsn'stuff! The WikiWomen's Collaborative is a group of women from around the world who edit Wikipedia, contribute to its sister projects, and support the mission of free knowledge. We recently updated our website, created new volunteer positions, and more! Get involved by:
Thanks for editing Wikipedia, and we look forward to you being a part of the Collaborative! -- EdwardsBot (talk) 00:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC) |