This portal is a former featured portal. Please see the links under Portal milestones below for its original nomination page and why it was removed.
Portal milestones Date Process Result October 2, 2006 Featured portal candidate Not promoted December 23, 2006 Featured portal candidate Promoted October 3, 2010 Featured portal review Demoted
Current status: Former featured portal

This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Business Top‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business Top This redirect has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Economics Top‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics Top This redirect has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Finance & Investment Mid‑importance This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment Mid This redirect has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Occupations (inactive) This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations

This whole part needs a serious editing from someone who knows at least the basics of economics:

"Economics is largely taught as five specific "schools" of thought:

   Classical economics, which provided the framework for later developments in microeconomics and both Neoclassical and Marxian theory, focusing on relative competitive advantage, the utility of competitive markets, land development, the labor theory of value and the division of labor
   Institutional economics, which focuses on the role of institutional design and how institutions shape consumer choice and affect economic performance
   Marxian economics, which studies the cause of economic crises, the source of value in economics, class relations in society, distribution of the surplus product and surplus value, and the labor theory of value
   Neoclassical economics, which focuses on price theory, constrained maximization as faced by both producers and consumers, marginal utility and rational choice theory as well as a macroeconomic focus on technical analysis of aggregate measures such as Gross Domestic Product and narrow technical models whose objective is "balanced growth" between human capital and "economic capital" and which deals with complex economic questions largely by abstracting them into debt to GDP ratio and other fragile technical measures
   Environmental economics which narrowed from many independent analyses in the 20th century towards a clear and internationally-agreed set of standards from 1990 on, including the Kyoto Protocol and culminating in UN study of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity, the Convention on Biological Diversity and changes to the United Nations System of National Accounts to begin to reflect risks to, and value added by, nature's services."

1. First of all economics is NOT taught as a five specific "schools" of thought.

Economic is a science not a religion, and thus it is not taught by "schools" but the content of lectures and textbooks is constructed from various schools of economic thought which were able to establish theories which are consistent with the scientific method, and which have a high explanatory value and are sound basis for at least relatively (to competing theories) good predictions about economy.

Economics is taught as microeconomics, macroeconomics, international economics, policy economics, environmental economics, institutional economics etc., and not as these different schools of thought. However, usually undergraduate textbooks mentions only the largest two or three subfields microeconomics, macroeconomics, and international economics.^[1] I believe that listing these three plus maybe leaving the environmental economics (with corrected description)and institutional economics would suffice.

These different schools of thought represent historical development of economics not a way of how economics is taught. Moreover, environmental economics is not even an school (see point 2.), environmental economics is a subfield of economics.^[2]

2. This is totally wrong:

"Environmental economics which narrowed from many independent analyses in the 20th century towards a clear and internationally-agreed set of standards from 1990 on, including the Kyoto Protocol and culminating in UN study of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity, the Convention on Biological Diversity and changes to the United Nations System of National Accounts to begin to reflect risks to, and value added by, nature's services." 

- This is totally wrong, Environmental economics is defined as: “part of economics which deals with interrelationship between environment and economic development and studies the ways and means by which the former is not impaired nor the latter impeded It is thus a branch of economics which discusses about the impacts of interaction between men and nature and finds human solutions to maintain harmony between men and nature.^[3]

3. This is also wrong:

"Marxian economics, which studies the cause of economic crises, the source of value in economics, class relations in society, distribution of the surplus product and surplus value, and the labour theory of value."

First of all every school of economic tough from classical to new neoclassical-synthesis studied/is studying the cause of economic crises and the source of value in economics. Marxian school had only a different approach to these question in the same way as different historical school of biology studied the origin of species differently and with different approach.

Moreover the theory of value which Marxist economics uses is actually the classical theory of value or labor theory of value, so how can anyone even say something like that this school studies the sources of value. Furthermore, the most notable contributions into the understanding of the business cycle or "economic crisis" were done by Keynesian, Monetarist, Neokeynesian and Neoclasical school.

Here is some workable definition of Marxist economics: In Marxist economics, the objective is to explain the existence of profits despite the fact that "labor produces all value," and to use the explanation as a tool to understand, and anticipate, the dynamics of capitalist society. The Marxist labor theory of value holds: In a capitalist economy,the "natural price" or value of any commodity is its cost of production"^[4]

Furthermore, why heterodox school like Marxian economics, which standing in present day economics is similar to the standing of creationism in biology was included and schools like Keynesian, or Neokeynesian which were/are part of mainstream economics are absolutely omitted? Omitting these schools, when dealing with schools of economics tough is like omitting Newton´s physics in article about physics.

I mean, I understand that Marxian school is attractive to non-economics majors, but I always though that wikipedia contributors should at least try to stay unbiased. I think that this was done by someone with either ideological bias, or poor knowledge since even Nobel laureates in economics like Solow and Stigler who hold strong left wing world-views said about the Marxian economics that:

"Economists working in the Marxian-Sraffian tradition represent a small minority of modern economists, and that their writings have virtually no impact upon the professional work of most economists in major English-language universities." - George Stigler.

"Marx was an important and influential thinker, and Marxism has been a doctrine with intellectual and practical influence. The fact is, however, that most serious English-speaking economists regard Marxist economics as an irrelevant dead end." Robert Solow

Moreover, Marxian economic school or references to it are almost non-existent in standard economic textbooks (with exception of economic history). I learned undergraduate economics from Samuelson and Nordhaus´s Famous Economics, and Mankiw´s principles of economics, which are perhaps the most widely used undergrad textbooks in the whole world, and I never noticed anything about Marxian economics. ^[5][6]

This makes sense since Marxian school represent more a part of economic history like historical school, or classical school for example. I know that it is still popular among people and that is ok, but this page should represent the profile of economics, not profile of popular public opinion.

Thus why was a school which is really, with all due respect to its historical importance and contributions to the development of modern economic science, now mostly dead due to progress in the field included amongst modern mainstream schools, and mixed together with subfields of economics, and even very poorly described as a branch which focuses on crisis and value. This description even goes against the description of Marxian economics on its wikipedia page. There, really had to be some ideological bias, or maybe only poor knowledge which is actually probable considering other mistakes.

But I am not saying that there should be no reference to Marxian economics, since it is surely important part of economic history and a heterodox school, but it should be properly labeled among all other heterodox schools of economics tough, since all heterodox schools are equal, and not mixed with the mainstream.

Either way these schools are the labels of different historical approaches to economics, and they should be in section dealing with history of the development of economic thought not in the article about contemporary economics. They should be either all listed somewhere on this page or left completely.

4. There are more mistakes, on this page but they are relatively small.

Please, could someone fix this part and replace schools with subfields, and include the Microeconomics, Macroeconomics, International Economics, while correcting description of environmental economics, and leaving institutional economics since that one is correct. I do not know how to properly do all connections etc. in wikipedia, and I am not a native English speaker so could please someone go over my proposed adjustments, and correct spelling or other possible mistakes, and edit this page?

Here is my proposal for adjusting the text:

Economics is largely taught as five specific subfields:

Microeconomics: is a branch of economics that studies the behavior of individual households and firms in making decisions on the allocation of limited resources. Microeconomics, applies to markets where goods or services are bought and sold. Microeconomics examines how decisions and behaviors affect the supply and demand for goods and services, which determines prices, and how prices, in turn, determine the quantity supplied and quantity demanded of goods and services. ^[7]

Macroeconomics:branch of economics dealing with the performance, structure, behavior, and decision-making of an economy as a whole, rather than individual markets. This includes national, regional, and global economies. With microeconomics, macroeconomics is one of the two most general fields in economics.^[8]

International Economics: is subfield concerned with the effects upon economic activity of international differences in productive resources and consumer preferences and the international institutions that affect them. It seeks to explain the patterns and consequences of transactions and interactions between the inhabitants of different countries, including trade, investment and migration.^[9]

Environmental Economics: “part of economics which deals with interrelationship between environment and economic development and studies the ways and means by which the former is not impaired nor the latter impeded It is thus a branch of economics which discusses about the impacts of interaction between men and nature and finds human solutions to maintain harmony between men and nature.^[10]

Institutional Economics: which focuses on the role of institutional design and how institutions shape consumer choice and affect economic performance

However, there are also others subfield of economics (see:http://www.aeaweb.org/students/Fields.php)

Alternatively it would be enough to only include Micro and Macro economics, since those are the major branches and others are less relevant, and I am not sure if it would be fair to include institutional economics or ecological economics and not to include also agrarian economics, or financial economics etc.

1muflon1 (talk) 22:57, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS: If you have more time please look also on the rest of the page, there are other small mistakes here and there.

The "Introduction" box in most portals is about ten lines deep. This portal's essay should be drastically trimmed. Normally I'd copy the lead paragraph or two from the topic's main article, but the lead at Economics is also too long for a portal. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good observations, what do we need to do to get editors consensus to rewrite the introduction? Also I would like to remind other editors that this is supposed to be a BUSINESS and ECONOMICS portal, meaning that we have to say something about management, industries classification and goverment policy/regulation as well. Also there seems to be some broken links on this page.Lbertolotti (talk) 16:35, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you've trimmed the introductory text by about half; looks good to me. The remaining sentences in italics could be the next to go? Missing topics could be added to the list of "Selected articles" rather than in the "introduction" box. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Lbertolotti (talk) 13:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Link to discussion Lbertolotti (talk) 20:44, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikinews Importer Bot hasn't edited since February, and the bot operator, Misza13 (talk · contribs), hasn't edited at the English Wikipedia for almost a year. I think this portal's news sub-page will have to be maintained manually, or could be removed entirely. The Wikinews pages were removed from Portal:Current events in July 2013 (discussion). -- John of Reading (talk) 21:10, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, how does this page actually loads the news and market data?Lbertolotti (talk) 14:15, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Lbertolotti: Wikinews loads some extra software, described at mw:Extension:DynamicPageList (Wikimedia), which adds a <DynamicPageList>...</DynamicPageList> tag to the markup tags usually available. That "magically" picks up and displays the the most recent additions to a category. At Wikinews they use some categories to identify stories that are about economy and business and are ready for publication.

Then, over at this project, the Wikinews Importer Bot used to look for instances of User:Wikinews Importer Bot/config, such as the one hidden at Portal:Business and economics/Business news/Wikinews - a template, even though it is part of user space - and act on the encoded instructions to copy the page from Wikinews to Wikipedia. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:58, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can't we replicate this procedure at this portal? That way we won't have to rely on botsLbertolotti (talk) 19:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing to stop you, or any other editor, updating Portal:Business and economics/Business news manually from the Wikinews page, but wouldn't it get rather tedious? -- John of Reading (talk) 19:47, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My points is: if tagged articles are displayed at Wikinews, why don't make they be displayed here as well?Lbertolotti (talk) 20:12, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because this wasn't built into the design of the DynamicPageList software; it doesn't have any options to pull content from one WikiMedia project (Wikinews) to another (Wikipedia). -- John of Reading (talk) 21:00, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well I made a bot request some time ago, but it seems nobody noticed.Lbertolotti (talk) 21:14, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've got some good news regarding the market data panel, I can write a bot to load the text from this page on the Portal:Business and economics/Market Indices, but for this to work we would need to have a template here on wikipedia with the same syntax.Lbertolotti (talk) 03:33, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Lbertolotti: If you're planning to run a bot then you need to get approved first, but I'm sure you knew that. Another thought is that if you're able to run bot code, then the source code for the Wikinews Importer Bot is here, or you could email Misza13 (talk · contribs) for the latest code. That would benefit not only this portal but many others.

Yes, I'll have a go at transferring the Wikinews stock market template over here so that your bot code doesn't have to worry about the formatting. The licensing/attribution requirements for Wikinews are less strict than those for Wikipedia. I'd prefer it to be named something like Portal:Business and economics/Market Indices/Layout, making it specific to this portal; your code would have to strip out the text {{Stock Markets and replace it with {{Portal:Business and economics/Market Indices/Layout. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:40, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@John of Reading Ok, shouldn't be too difficult to get this done.Lbertolotti (talk) 15:44, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Lbertolotti: I've brought the templates across. See my recent edits to Portal:Business and economics/Market Indices. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:36, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@John of Reading Well my bot works with Tool Labs, but first it needs to get approved.Lbertolotti (talk) 02:28, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@John of Reading Do you have any idea why Portal box bot stopped updating market data? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lbertolotti (talk • contribs) 14:05, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My usual answer to questions like that would be "ask the bot operator". Since that's you, in this case, I'm stuck! I don't know how bot tasks are set running. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@John of Reading Well the portal seems to be working fine now. What do you think?Lbertolotti (talk) 19:50, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Had to add the Banking regulation and standards Template ({'{Basel II}})on a bunch of articles were missing, I believe it's necessary to put them on a context.

Just wondering if someone can add Wikipedia:WikiProject Business/Article alerts to Things you can do? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 19:26, 24 December 2015 (UTC)please ping me[reply]

On April 21, 2016, marks 70 years since John Maynard Keynes died, so all his works is now under public domain

source Keynes passed away 70 years ago today --WiZaRd SaiLoR (talk) 19:32, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion taking place about the possible merger of Template:Infobox economist with Template:Infobox academic. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 20:41, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]