Talk:Capitalism/Archive 16

message: It's common practice that criticisms sections/articles have refutation of criticisms. Otherwise they are unbalanced and violate NPOV. Presence of criticisms section implies that rest of the article is written from pro-capitalists perspective, and that isn't the case. -- Vision Thing -- 16:11, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it implies that, it implies that the article is about discussing the topic in hand (capitalism) and presents capitalism neutrally.  If there are criticisms they should be voiced as neutrally as possible (drawing attention to them and linking readers to source articles.  I don't think rebuttals get anywhere, but anti-capitalists would then say they should have rebuttals to the rebuttals.  More productive would be to have a small section on proponents of capitalism 9as opposed to theorists/analysts).  We should avoid a debate sound.--Red Deathy 16:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, pro-capitalism section can be solution too. But as it now stands, this article is unbalanced. -- Vision Thing -- 16:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.Ultramarine 16:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Hardly, a couple of paras that mention that some peopel are critical and giving brief reasons does not unbalanced make - but go ahead and write a para on advocates of capitalism.--Red Deathy 16:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

text: One example of the unbalance is Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters constant deletions of views he does not like, like the chart above.Ultramarine 16:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The chart didn't have a lot of content actually, but maybe one with more data would be fine.--MONGO 16:56, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can certainly make a more detailed one by listing nations instead of continents or after 1820. However, I think the graph is quite interesting already. Much of economics deal with increasng GDP/capita which in turn increases the general standard of living, so this estimate has great importance.Ultramarine 16:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a wide variety of potential sources which could be used to render a graph about GDP/capita and how that may be a signal of growth. Maybe post graphs here before adding them to the article page...since this article has had some heated exchanges in the past...best to hammer out any additions here first.--MONGO 05:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That principle was certainly not followed by those who advocate for the current version. The whole article was rewritten more or less from scratch in a single edit without discussing anything on talk. Regarding the chart, it is a significant view and the author has numerous citations in Google scholar on this subject as stated above. No one has shown that it is incorrect or given an alternative sourced view. If someone does this, then we have a factual discussion. Otherwise we have deletion of significant views just because someone dislikes them, which violates NPOV.Ultramarine 05:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: there are more criteria than significance, such as relevence to the article, which is a matter of editorial judgement, and a graph with most of the years marked zero for no data is pretty useless - a chart based on the 1820 data onwrds might be useful, and fit with the history of capitalism section - but then, there are so many wqondersful charts out there (shoudl I go look for one that shows how the economic share of profit holders goes up when teh share going to wages goes down?).--Red Deathy 07:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would be very interested in any factual arguments, if you can find any sourced. Economic growth was central to, for example, Adam Smith, so obviously is should be important for this article too.Ultramarine 07:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms section 

message: The page is now protected...I did this to keep the low level edit war in check and to keep you people under 3RR...so play nice.--MONGO 22:09, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected