Misplaced Pages

User talk:EllenCT: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:14, 7 January 2014 editMattnad (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers7,755 edits Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion: fix link← Previous edit Revision as of 07:34, 7 January 2014 edit undoVictorD7 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users4,648 edits January 2014: Reply.Next edit →
Line 1,414: Line 1,414:
:::I said that because he had valid arguments, and when he explained further I thought the arguments were even more valid (the ITEP's federal income tax has yet to be explained in-depth). I have yet to see a rebuttal from you which addresses the substance. Do you think you're editing in a completely nonpartisan fashion? I don't have time read the tens of thousands of bytes you and him have expended in your arguments, but I do notice that you keep saying he wants to use non-peer-reviewed publications but the peer reviewed literature you're relying on isn't immediately apparent to me, especially since you don't like the ], which publishes working papers on its model, but are partial to the ] (ITEP) model, which does not appear to publish details on its model. In any case, the debate over the substance is somewhat irrelevant to the bad faith tone and insults. ] | (] - ]) 03:58, 6 January 2014 (UTC) :::I said that because he had valid arguments, and when he explained further I thought the arguments were even more valid (the ITEP's federal income tax has yet to be explained in-depth). I have yet to see a rebuttal from you which addresses the substance. Do you think you're editing in a completely nonpartisan fashion? I don't have time read the tens of thousands of bytes you and him have expended in your arguments, but I do notice that you keep saying he wants to use non-peer-reviewed publications but the peer reviewed literature you're relying on isn't immediately apparent to me, especially since you don't like the ], which publishes working papers on its model, but are partial to the ] (ITEP) model, which does not appear to publish details on its model. In any case, the debate over the substance is somewhat irrelevant to the bad faith tone and insults. ] | (] - ]) 03:58, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
:::: is the best peer-reviewed source (secondary because it's based on multiple OECD datasets) and is the peer-reviewed source closest to supporting the idea of a 0% corporate tax incidence on consumers, from the same issue of the same journal, but it's a primary source, with new methods and much weaker conclusions about labor instead of consumers in general. The vast majority of other peer reviewed papers agree with the former in that about half are above and half below its concluded incidence rate of about 60%. The traditional figure on which the ITEP models was based was 45.5%, but that figure is from the 1940s and there are good reasons to believe that tax avoidance and evasion is very different today. There is no way to edit Misplaced Pages in a completely nonpartisan fashion. Refraining from editing reinforces the status quo which is mostly libertarian Austrian nonsense. The only way to achieve neutrality is to counter that systemic bias. It's not a case of both sides being equally valid. They are not; one side has models that can predict historical outcomes from prior empirical data, and the other does not. The same side has far more support in the peer reviewed literature. The same side is mathematically accurate. Trying to give equal weight to both sides introduces bases against valid hypotheses, biases against the peer reviewed secondary literature, and biases against mathematical accuracy. ] (]) 08:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC) :::: is the best peer-reviewed source (secondary because it's based on multiple OECD datasets) and is the peer-reviewed source closest to supporting the idea of a 0% corporate tax incidence on consumers, from the same issue of the same journal, but it's a primary source, with new methods and much weaker conclusions about labor instead of consumers in general. The vast majority of other peer reviewed papers agree with the former in that about half are above and half below its concluded incidence rate of about 60%. The traditional figure on which the ITEP models was based was 45.5%, but that figure is from the 1940s and there are good reasons to believe that tax avoidance and evasion is very different today. There is no way to edit Misplaced Pages in a completely nonpartisan fashion. Refraining from editing reinforces the status quo which is mostly libertarian Austrian nonsense. The only way to achieve neutrality is to counter that systemic bias. It's not a case of both sides being equally valid. They are not; one side has models that can predict historical outcomes from prior empirical data, and the other does not. The same side has far more support in the peer reviewed literature. The same side is mathematically accurate. Trying to give equal weight to both sides introduces bases against valid hypotheses, biases against the peer reviewed secondary literature, and biases against mathematical accuracy. ] (]) 08:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
:::::Ellen, your so called doesn't even mention the word "consumers". This is an irrelevant tangent to begin with, but do you have a single sourced quote supporting your claims about consumers? ] (]) 07:34, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Another , which is a false accusation as well. ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>16:14, 6 January 2014 (UTC)</i></small> Another , which is a false accusation as well. ] <sup>]</sup> <small><i>16:14, 6 January 2014 (UTC)</i></small>



Revision as of 07:34, 7 January 2014

This is EllenCT's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

Welcome

Hello, EllenCT, and Welcome to Misplaced Pages!

Hi there! I'm happy to help you with anything. You may have noticed that I responded to one of your talk page suggestions. I really encourage you to be bold. Find a subject and spend some time focusing on it for a few hours and crafting some good language. II | (t - c) 08:19, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help

Sorry for the automated message; I am a real person and I appreciate some of your suggestions on talk pages. II | (t - c) 08:21, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

EllenCT, you are invited to the Teahouse

Teahouse logo

Hi EllenCT! Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Misplaced Pages and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Ushau97 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the TeahouseThis message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:15, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

using ref tags and cite templates

Hi, saw your short live question at the Teahouse about how to use ref tags and cite templates. Not a problem but a quick crash course in how to display them without upsetting the formatting :-) There's a very useful set of tags called <nowiki> </nowiki> which if you put them round anything else stop the wiki software acting upon those tags so to display <ref> without it affecting anything else I put nowiki tags round it. It's the same with {{cite}} or any other code.

Anyway to business, ref tags and cite templates are used mostly for Inline citations. The basics are:

"Add the article text that you want to reference<ref>Add the reference details in between some ref tags</ref>"

and then at the bottom of the article add {{reflist}} which is point at which the software will display all the references added. What you use for the reference details is up to you but this is where the family of {{citation}} templates come into their own.

There are quite a lot, but there are four that are more commonly used that the rest. These are {{cite web}} for web references, {{cite book}} for paper references, {{cite journal}} for sources from paper magazines, academic journals etc and {{cite news}} for news items either online or paper. Each has their own set of parameters which you can see by clicking on the links I've put in but in general there are a number of common parameters such as author(s), url (for online items), title, publisher/publication, date, page numbers (for paper references) etc. You don't have to use all of the parameters, but enough to get information over that would enable a reader to know where to look, if they wanted to look the source up.

I hope this is enough to get you started but if you have any questions either leave a message on here (I've added this page to my watchlist) or stop on by at the Teahouse again. NtheP (talk) 12:58, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Hooray! You Created Your Teahouse Profile!

Congratulations! You have earned the


Welcome to the Teahouse Badge Welcome to the Teahouse Badge
Awarded to editors who have introduced themselves at the Misplaced Pages Teahouse.

Guest editors with this badge show initiative and a great drive to learn how to edit Misplaced Pages.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

Thank you for introducing yourself and contributing to Misplaced Pages! ~ Missionedit (talk) 22:37, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Too big to fail, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Fisher (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Your Teahouse question has been answered

Hello, EllenCT. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Espresso Addict (talk) 01:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.

Sorry about the slow & not too helpful response! Espresso Addict (talk) 01:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Your Teahouse question has been answered

Hello, EllenCT. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by öBrambleberry of RiverClan 22:42, 16 March 2013 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, EllenCT. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by ⁓ Hello71 02:01, 17 March 2013 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.

Thank you for your excellent work!

This edit that you recently made at Presidency of Barack Obama is wonderful, and does a lot to improve the article.

In addition, your recent comments and questions at Talk:Presidency of Barack Obama are much appreciated.

The following link contains a huge number of links to reliable sources which you may find helpful: tinyurl.com/138examples

Lk54ui (talk) 23:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

You can reach me at lk54ui@hotmail.com Lk54ui (talk) 01:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Misplaced Pages, EllenCT! I have been editing Misplaced Pages for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Misplaced Pages! If you have any questions check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome! Spitfire19 /C 02:24, 23 March 2013 (UTC)


stewardship economy

I was a bit surprised that the Stewardship_economy was accepted - could you talk me through your thinking on this one - is it a theory that is widely known and cited in recent economics? --nonsense ferret 10:17, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, EllenCT. You have new messages at Nonsenseferret's talk page.
Message added 10:41, 25 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

nonsense ferret 10:41, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, EllenCT. You have new messages at Nonsenseferret's talk page.
Message added 14:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

nonsense ferret 14:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on Stewardship Economy

Very many thanks for the attention you have given to this submission - very helpful. It's good to have an editor who is familiar with the field, New Economics Foundation etc. The points about prose and references in the benefits section are well taken, and I will revise it along those lines at the weekend. There's no url for the supplement because it is still in draft form, but I can abstract suitable references from the material to add. I think I will chip in on the deletion page that Nonsenseferret has initiated and follow up some of the points there. Naturally I'm convinced by your arguments, and impressed that you have found those references, but if it is deleted don't let it discourage you - you may just be ahead of the curve. Very best wishes Julianpratt (talk) 21:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Greetings. I think this is going down http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stewardship_economy but many thanks for your efforts Julianpratt (talk) 06:57, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

on the U.S. section

hey. you've got some good sourced contribution on U.S. economy. But a couple of observations from an editor without 'a dog in this hunt.' Occasionally articles get a drive-by editor who only looks at long pages, and United States gets an occasional look-see by one of those sorts. So after I expanded U.S. constitution to about how I would like it to be, two editors and me doing some ancillary work alongside, have cut it by one-half. I think at the worst it was third-longest, yuk. my bad.

The editorial guideline/policy they used was "encyclopedic style". So there have been large chunks moved to subsidiary articles, and one spin-off article. Much ruffled feathers at the removal because articles that have "always been political science" and those which have "always been philosophy" did not appreciate spill-over from 'constitutional history', and what is that in a faculty senate, anyway, so over time, most have been removed as not "germane". But generally I have found that Misplaced Pages --- apart from occasional proprietary turf wars --- is open to "expanding knowledge" of contributions of sourced information.

Oh, yes, the point is that much of your latest contributions at 'United States' which are resisted there, might be welcomed at another linked subsidiary article. Also, I have found that lots of subsidiary articles are not linked into general articles. For instance, at one time, a delightful project editors initiated some time ago, a series of historical-context "" in the American Civil War]"" had not been linked in the "See also" section of WP-self reference links at 'American Civil War' at one time. Likewise because there was no project, the nomenclature for " in the American Civil War" articles were of various formats and titles, so harder to put together for African-American, Irish, German, Italian ethnics, Canadian, foreign, Mexican nationalities. I have not gotten to the Amerindian tribes. Those 'first-nations' were divided North and South each among the Five in Oklahoma, the Plains Indians made war on everybody. The Mexican reference at WP has no separate article, it is buried in a subsection of a memorial bridge, so it is periodically removed by someone with a bot? or a POV? removing the link to a bridge about Mexicans as not-germane. I suppose I should take it upon myself to create the 'Mexicans in the American Civil War' article.

An-y-wa-y, the point, the encyclopedia would be well served if you find a subsidiary article which fits your contribution more detailed economic information that is resisted in a summary-topic-type article, then you make sure it gets connected in the 'United States' article either by a subsection link "Main article" or at the bottom in the "See also" section, so there is a link for those pursuing more detailed economic metrics. The links are an easier sell because they are short (do not interrupt the summary narrative), sweet (lends depth and thereby stature to the article) and unobtrusive (if one-blue-lined link. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 10:01, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Initial public offering

Hello EllenCT

I have recently removed a paragraph from Initial Public Offering that you may have worked on, or contributed to. The paragraph contained allegations made by a plaintiff in an ongoing lawsuit, and was supported with a reference to a NYT Op/Ed piece. The allegations were presented as fact, rather than allegations. The Op/Ed piece was presented as fact, rather than as an opinion of the specific author. The author's interpretations of legal documents and securities underwriting activities were presented as fact, without reference to the author's background and knowledge of either the law or corporate finance. No attempt was made within the paragraph to present a balanced presentation of arguments made by both sides of the issue. The paragraph heading was inflammatory, and presumed the truth of Plaintiff's allegations.
I believe that the information you were attempting to present does have a place within the article. But that would require a re-write, as a neutral, with careful attention paid to the sorting out (and identification) of facts from allegations and opinions. Gulbenk (talk) 05:37, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
I copied this to Talk:Initial public offering#Corruption and will respond to it there. EllenCT (talk) 21:40, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:PIGS (economics)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:PIGS (economics). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 01:15, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

Here is the user page that has the format for the project:

http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Mcnabber091/Economy_of_the_United_States — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcnabber091 (talkcontribs) 05:56, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 April 2013

Economics ontology and schema

Thanks for you advice on how to improve the presentation. I'm glad that you're willing to help. The next step is to recreate User:Mcnabber091/Economy of the United States for all 196 countries. I would be very happy if you were willing to help create new wiki articles for more countries (ex. China, Sweden, United Kingdom, Ethiopia, Monaco, Nauru, Japan, etc.). Partial data is all I'm looking for. Copy/paste from: User:Mcnabber091/Economy of the United StatesMcnabber091 (talk) 17:42, 10 April 2013 (UTC) I think the tables are necessary for the data being presented. All of the data is in 3 or more columns.There will be sections that are primarily qualitative such as 'History'.Mcnabber091 (talk) 00:19, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

You really need to work with Wikidata on this. EllenCT (talk) 05:26, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Once Wikidata is finished, it will be an awesome resource for all wikimedia projects. Wikidata will compliment the Global Economic Map in a great way.Mcnabber091 (talk) 18:52, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Global Economic Map to-do

Right now I am looking for volunteers to post new country articles to the project page https://meta.wikimedia.org/Global_Economic_Map. If you have any questions on where to find the economic data I can tell you where to look. I have emailed about 30 professors around the world trying to find volunteers to help add content. I am going to email some more.Mcnabber091 (talk) 15:16, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi EllenCT, there are some new developments in my project and right now I am seeking outside opinion about where this project should be located within Wikimedia. Recently, I tried submiting a Misplaced Pages article named 'Economic summary of the United States' and was rejected. If you are interested in learning more you can check out, http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Economics#Global_Economic_Map Mcnabber091 (talk) 16:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 April 2013

Please comment on Talk:Silk Road (marketplace)

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Silk Road (marketplace). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 02:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

Please comment on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Economics

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Economics. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 00:16, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

Please comment on Talk:Turkey

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Turkey. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 00:41, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

Please comment on Talk:BP

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:BP. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 20:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

Please comment on Talk:BP

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:BP. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

Please comment on Talk:Southern Poverty Law Center

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Southern Poverty Law Center. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 21:15, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2013-06-03

Please comment on Talk:Monarchy of Canada

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Monarchy of Canada. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 June 2013

Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2013-06-10

Mapping the global economy on wikipedia

Hi Ellen, I hope your finals went well this Spring. Mine went well.

Now that the summer has begun for me, I am going to actively add to the project.

I'm curious to hear if you still want to help out and which country you would like to work on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcnabber091 (talkcontribs) 22:09, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

I got a job and a near-perfect lab grade, but my graduation is delayed until Fall due to circumstances beyond my control. I am thinking of creating a guide to high-yield bond index funds amenable to foreign investment trusts in the developing world. It seems to me that is how I could help the greatest number while increasing income equality and building my own professional reputation outside of my day-to-day work as an analyst. Have you made contact with Wikidata about your almanac-style project? EllenCT (talk) 09:34, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Crooks & Liars

Are you 'News Hound Ellen'? If so, WP:SELFCITE should be considered. (And with that guideline in mind, WP:SPS would restrict you from making any comment about a third party.) – S. Rich (talk) 14:15, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

No, and I don't even know who that is. I don't even read C&L regularly, except when one of their stories comes up on my http://getprismatic.com profile, which they do about once per week. Are you John Stossel or related to him or have a financial interest in his work? EllenCT (talk) 15:29, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
I only asked the question because "Ellen" is used as the name on the blog. I was not implying WP:COI. I am not John Stossell. I do not have any connection to him or his work. – S. Rich (talk) 15:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Baseless NPOV accusation

Information icon Hello, I'm Srich32977. Misplaced Pages is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Economic inequality seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Yes, there is a discussion involving you and Morphh. But the issue (in the real world) is not resolved. Seeking to skew the Garret study as an "early" one was not proper.S. Rich (talk) 15:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

This topic has as much to do with "June 2013" as there is evidence that people who think the jury is still out on income inequality have read the math. I thought that policy specified that these discussions should take place on article talk pages, not user talk pages, but perhaps there is some contrary mathematics that I don't know about and as such my ability to judge that 2010 is earlier than 2011 needs to go down on my permanent record. :( EllenCT (talk) 16:11, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
The heading is added automatically by the template bot, and it serves to parse recent postings from others. I've revised it. Not a big issue. I did post the message as a reminder to you about the necessity to follow NPOV, which became a concern in the Economic inequity edit you made. In posting this message, I hope to remind you to look at your edits. The discussion about what should be in the actual article is well underway on that talk page. I shall follow it with interest. Turn that :( into a ! – S. Rich (talk) 16:26, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
If you want me to be happy then please read the sources and answer the questions I've asked. How would you like it if someone accused you of political bias when you knew you were mathematically and otherwise correct? EllenCT (talk) 17:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Ellen, you asked if I was connected with Stossel and I answered. Your questions had absolutely no foundation, but implied COI and bias on my part. On the other hand, I asked you if you were News Hound Ellen because both New Hound and you use the same name. (And given your response, I will continue to WP:AGF.) My concern about income inequality was regarding the particular edit you made some two weeks after the last commentary on the talk page. It was an improper edit because it mischaracterized what the Garret article said.
I am not going to engage in debate with you about income equality in general. That subject is too complex and controversial, and I have other interests. You might be mathematically and politically and otherwise correct, but the issue, for us as Wikipedians, concerns proper editing. Please be careful and don't let your correctness (and/or motivation about the subject) hamper good editing. Jesus told us we will always have the poor amongst us (Matthew 26:11 and Mark 14:7). If that is true, then our edits to WP won't change the world. But we do need to approach our edits with the best NPOV attitude we can muster. – S. Rich (talk) 18:18, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
That sentence has a second clause. EllenCT (talk) 03:50, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Indeed it does. Still, Jesus said decision to help them is voluntary, and Jesus recognizes that helping them directly is a feckless undertaking (because they will always be amongst us). Enormous progress has been made in the last few decades of the 2 millennia to reduce poverty around the world. Moreover, this progress did not come about because people with "good ideas" go about using other people's money to help those who will not help themselves. Is there income/wealth inequality? Yes. But I am not going to get upset about it. – S. Rich (talk) 13:40, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
"Feckless"? These last few decades have seen the most poverty reduction where modern post-industrial NGOs such as Doctors without Borders, the Peace Corps, and the World Bank have been throwing around the same mix of donated and other people's tax money as the state-supported missions of the 15th-19th centuries did, but with increasing efficiency and more powerful agricultural tools. EllenCT (talk) 17:53, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
. In Africa, at least, the aid effort has not been too worthwhile. But you are certainly right about more powerful agriculture. Technology, which is developed by corporations and implemented by farmers, has had dramatic impact on reducing hunger -- is part of the story. NGO giveaway programs do not help. In fact, they hinder. – S. Rich (talk) 18:20, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Who do you think has been sowing the "high-yielding varieties" mentioned in that Nature Geoscience article, teaching the locals how to tend them, and digging their irrigation channels? Most of the lack of progress in Africa has been due to the AIDS epidemic in the 1990s shown at right and progress there should continue to accelerate. Do you still contend that the voluntary actions separating the Sheep from the Goats at the Last Judgement are "feckless"? EllenCT (talk) 19:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 June 2013

Please comment on Talk:March Against Monsanto

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:March Against Monsanto. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 22:15, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 June 2013

Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2013-06-24

Reading about taxes, I thought of you!

Hi Ellen, just dropping a note to say hi. I hope you don't mind that I'm keeping on eye on you. Anyway, I don't have anything particular to discuss except to say that I hope you don't get too burnt out or discouraged by the contentious debates around here, and you find the time to stick around, even if on a limited basis. Over the years I've tended to get into the habit of just moving on to another topic when I get into a vicious debate. Perhaps not the best habit, but it can reduce stress. However, I certainly don't want to discourage you from spirited debate. Regards, II | (t - c) 07:18, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Publishers Clearing House

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Publishers Clearing House. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 July 2013

Barnstar for you

The Original Barnstar
I've been reading your commentary on Economic inequity. Thoughtful, intelligent, helpful and well done prose. In less than 4 months and with less than 1,000 edits, you've given us worthwhile food for thought. Thank you. – S. Rich (talk) 05:57, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Murray Rothbard

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Murray Rothbard. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Misplaced Pages:Feedback request service.RFC bot (talk) 23:15, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Tech news: 2013-28

Latest ] from the Wikimedia technical community. Please inform other users about these changes. ] are available.

Recent software changes (Not all changes will affect you.)

  • VisualEditor news:
    • VisualEditor deployment has been delayed by a week. It is now planned to enable the editor for logged–in editors on chosen Wikipedias on July 22, and on all Wikipedias on July 29.
    • A bug that made it impossible to save VisualEditor edits that triggered a CAPTCHA has been fixed.
    • Several bugs that occurred on right–to–left wikis have been fixed last week (bug #49416, bug #49613, bug #50543).
  • Uploading files has been restricted on Meta Wiki to administrators and the newly created uploader group. An exemption doctrine policy is being developed (bug #50287).
  • Emergency priority CentralNotice banners will always be shown unless users have hidden them, ignoring cookies set for lower priority banners.

Future software changes

  • MediaWiki will allow choosing a specific page of a PDF document or a thumbnail of a video file to show up inside the
    tag (bug #8480).