Talk:Feminist economics

message: Several of the diagrams are incorrectly devised. Chopped off scales do not belong in a serious article, so diagrams like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_womens_earnings_and_employment_by_industry_2009.png seriously harm the credibility of the article. This is not because the diagram actually shows incorrect data, but because it exaggerates the point to be made, at a quick glance they do not portray the data.
The risk is that readers who would otherwise have found the article informative and reasonable might view it a dubious and POV.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.208.240.230 (talk) 00:57, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diagrams 

message: This article is currently classified amongst "Economic thought" in the box at the bottom of the page which includes schools of thought such as Classical, Neo-classical, Keynesian, etc. Doesn't seem as though "feminist economics" is considered as a distinct school of thought; surely it takes more than one peer-reviewed journal and a Wikipedia page to give the school the credibility it needs to be stood amongst Marx, Keynes, the Austrian School, etc? Many of the female specific issues mentioned in the introduction to the article are also covered by other fields, such as labour economics. The article even includes the statement "there is no definitive list of the principles of feminist economics". Is this really a school of thought? Can someone explain and/or condense the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.216.83.226 (talk) 13:08, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a good chance it isn't. Anything on Wikipedia given the attachment "feminist" tends to get a pass whether it's legitimate or not (ie, systemic bias). It could at least use a criticism section if not a nomination for deletion. 96.63.25.34 (talk) 21:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this even a field of study/school of thought? 

message: Should we subject this article to peer review? Lbertolotti (talk) 15:13, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Peer_review|Peer review]] 

message: There may be an opportunity here to discuss theories regarding the monetizing of the non-market activities and the effects thereof. Amartya Sen would be a good source for looking into this. Alexbolden15 (talk) 21:47, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exclusion of non-market activity section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Feminist economics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111102232157/http://www.celj.org/best_new_journal to http://www.celj.org/best_new_journal
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:17, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Feminist economics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130527114151/https://www.e-elgar.co.uk/bookentry_main.lasso?id=3226 to https://www.e-elgar.co.uk/bookentry_main.lasso?id=3226
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121003175716/http://aacu.org/psew/publications/Classroom_Climate_ChilyOne.pdf to http://www.aacu.org/psew/publications/Classroom_Climate_ChilyOne.pdf
*Added  tag to http://tek.bke.hu/regikorok/sen/docs/development.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140909194253/http://gatton.uky.edu/faculty/hoytw/751/articles/samuelsonsic.pdf to http://gatton.uky.edu/faculty/hoytw/751/articles/samuelsonsic.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120626004713/http://www.ucm.es/cont/descargas/documento6327.pdf to http://www.ucm.es/cont/descargas/documento6327.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140119062111/http://appweb.cortland.edu/ojs/index.php/Wagadu/article/viewFile/383/729 to http://appweb.cortland.edu/ojs/index.php/Wagadu/article/viewFile/383/729
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:19, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article has been rated as Mid-importance in the Economics project, which is defined as:
Subject fills in more minor details of economics, or adds a depth of understanding to the field. A practicing economist would find these subjects useful, but lay people would likely not.
I would dispute the current article rating. Feminist economics is gaining relevance in the mainstream and established schools of economic thought and I believe it should be tagged as High Importance:
Subject is important but not vital to a lay person's overview of economics. Broad economic topics taught at the undergraduate college level are likely of high importance. 
Pedro H.V. Santos (talk) 08:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article rating under "Economics" project