Talk:How to Argue with an Economist

Removed weasel words and wordiness

I've removed weasel words and wordiness which cluttered the article and watered down what was being said. Johnfos (talk) 23:22, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

No - you made no changes, rather it is a simple revert of my changes and returned it to your version where you state the author's opinion as fact. here. It is only the author's opinion - it is not a fact. It may be valid opinion, it may be widely even majority held opinion, and it might be very extensively researched opinion, but it's still opinion and needs to be expressed as such. Your preferred version is (as with many of your articles on books) is in breach of WP:NPOV. If you don't like my actual word choice, you can change that, as long as it maintains it is clear we are showing the author's opinion and not a fact. If you are not satisfied with this (and your other book articles), then I'm more than happy for further comment to be sought. I suggest the AUstralian editor's notice board is a good start. And, I don't know how my changes are WP:WEASEL - have you read that page. --Merbabu (talk) 00:23, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Third opinion

Well, I don't really like either formulation. The one by Johnfos does seem to state as fact what is an opinion, albeit a possibly well argued one. The one by Merbabu goes to extreme (discusses, opinion, so-called) in pointing out that these are opinions and not facts and thus dismisses what may well be well argued opinions. One would prefer to phrase the statement in a way that makes it clear that the book is the work of one person while not pushing that down the reader's throat. My preference would be to use a simpler formulation such as:

In this book, Lindy Edwards explores the role of economics in society, as well as the influence of "economic rationalism" on Australian politics. Edwards (or Prof./Dr. Edwards if appropriate) argues that this economic view overlooks important social issues and explains how, in his opinion, it transforms (has transformed?) Australian culture

--RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 19:31, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on How to Argue with an Economist: Reopening Political Debate in Australia. 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/20140521083808/http://lindyedwards.com/reviews/how-to-argue-with-an-economist/ to http://lindyedwards.com/reviews/how-to-argue-with-an-economist/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:44, 7 November 2017 (UTC)