Austrian Economics Wiki:Commons

2010-12-13T00:22:31Z

PLj9N: Request

<div class="messagebox" style="width:100%; padding:.5em;">Welcome to '''The Mises Commons''', the central discussion board where you can make announcements, propose new ideas, and ask questions of the entire community.

<p>To add a new item, add a <code><nowiki>==Level two header==</nowiki></code> to introduce it.</p>

<p>For discussion related to long-term planning and development, also see the [https://groups.google.com/a/mises.com/group/wiki/topics Mises Wiki Google Group].</p></div>
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
{{TOC right}}
==Style guide==
I would like to recommend that we use the ''Chicago Manual of Style'' as a basis for a [[MisesWiki:Manual of Style]] rather than the [[wikipedia:WP:MOS|Wikipedia Manual of Style]]. The WP:MOS makes a large number of stylistic concessions in order to appeal to international speakers of English, resulting in a MOS that incorporates a variety of styles. Mises.org uses CMS as its style guide, and I think it makes sense to use it here as well, as most of our readers are Americans. Two things affected are:
*Spelling (use American all the time)
*Punctuation in relation to quotation marks (commas and periods should always appear inside quotation marks)
I'm sure there are others, but these are the ones that come to mind. Thoughts? --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 16:09, 29 November 2010 (CST)

[[Category:Mises Wiki|Commons]]

==New project==
It seems we could use a new project for the organization of small things - checking links, wikification of text, creating stubs, etc. Also needs a way to easily vote on the next page of interest. Ideas? [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 18:05, 2 December 2010 (CST)
:Sounds reasonable. I'll set it up with some ideas at [[MisesWiki:WikiProject Cleanup]]. We'll need to develop more cleanup categories. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 09:38, 3 December 2010 (CST)
::Looks nice already! Thanks. [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 15:03, 3 December 2010 (CST)

==Most wanted Stub==
Below, let's vote on the most desired stub, that is still missing and really, really should be created, with some good content for a start. Please edit this list: anyone can add more candidates to it, and vote for any number of them - but only once on each. Of course, anyone can create the stub(s) in question, too! Once created, the candidates will be removed from the list. [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 15:03, 3 December 2010 (CST)

* [[Free market]]: +2
* [[Karl Marx]]: +1
* [[World War I]]: +1
* [[New Deal]]: +1

==Most wanted update==
Which page badly deserves to be extended? Please edit this list: anyone can add more candidates to it, and vote for any number of them - but only once on each. Of course, anyone can update the page, too! Once sufficiently improved, the candidates will be removed from the list (but can be entered again for another round of updates). [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 15:03, 3 December 2010 (CST)

* [[‎John Maynard Keynes]]: +1
* [[Franklin Delano Roosevelt]]: +1
* [[Charity]]: +1
* [[Estate tax]]: +1

== "External links" --> "Links"? ==

Any thoughts on not using WP's convention of calling the links at the end "External links" but instead simply "Links"? My thinking is that in many cases the links are pointing to mises.org pages (such as literature pages, blog posts, etc.) and thus are not strictly "external." Plus, the word is redundant anyway. We could still use "See also" for referring to tangentially related wiki articles. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 10:43, 6 December 2010 (CST)
:I am open to that upon first reflection. I am assuming we would likely continue a "See also" section for other related Mises Wiki article links not mentioned already in the main text. -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 10:46, 6 December 2010 (CST)
::Right. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 10:49, 6 December 2010 (CST)
:Actually, that is a good idea! [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 11:23, 6 December 2010 (CST)

== Positioning links from Mises Wiki to Wikipedia ==

I have been noticing links to Wikipedia main articles in various locations within the list of links to other resources, articles, etc. Perhaps we might suggest that, if the link to the related main Wikipedia entry is included, we make it the final entry in the list. I am thinking the reader is somewhat more likely to be getting a Classical-Liberal (and similar) point of view in the first links indicated, with the general readership-orientation of Wikipedia best fit for the reader's last choice. If this is already the working style, then perhaps someone might confirm. Thoughts? -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 12:02, 9 December 2010 (CST)
:That seems reasonable. Same for other general resources, I suppose. --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 12:09, 9 December 2010 (CST)

== Suggested order of closing sections ==

Is there a working rule of thumb for the order of the closing sections? I just added the '''See also''' section on the [[Great Depression#See also|Great Depression]] page, and it seems out of whack.

I am thinking the order should be:

* See also
* Links
* References

Opinions? Input? And are there further sections we should take into account in this discussion? Thanks! -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 20:06, 9 December 2010 (CST)
:WP standard is "See also" then "References" then "Links" (see [[wikipedia:WP:FOOTERS]]). I like links to be last because they are least related to the content of the article. References specifically relate to the article itself; links point the reader outside the wiki and thus (IMHO) belong at the end. I'm okay with putting "See also" below or above references; either way makes sense. Other footer section types might be "Works" (i.e., on the page of a person – include a list of books he's written) and "Further reading" (like "Links" but to hard copy books for which links aren't available and which weren't used as references). Regarding those, I say Works first, and Further reading second to last. So:
:*Works
:*References
:*See also
:*Further reading
:*Links
:Or switch 2 and 3. Other ideas? --[[User:Forgottenman|Forgottenman]] ([[User talk:Forgottenman|talk]]) 22:57, 9 December 2010 (CST)

== Article # 400 ==

Don't know if anyone noticed, but our 400th article is on none other than [[Taxation]] !! -- [[User:RayBirks|RayBirks]] 13:06, 12 December 2010 (CST)
:Yes, great work everyone! I wonder when we can get to 500. :) [[User:Pestergaines|Pestergaines]] 17:59, 12 December 2010 (CST)
== Guide ==

A guide of articles for newbies to basics of Economics or mises would be great. I don't know where start and it would be great to have that sort of guide/suggestion to start reading some articles.

The Austrian Economics Wiki - User contributions [en]

Austrian Economics Wiki:Commons