Talk:Spontaneous order

Latest comment: 1 year ago by Rummboysrc in topic Why is "I, Pencil" a See also link?


Same as Self-organization? edit

If as the lead (persuasively) states this topic is the same as self-organization, why do we need two articles on the topic? Much of this article would form a useful History section in the self-organization article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:56, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Spontaneous order. 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:

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) 20:10, 15 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Why is "I, Pencil" a See also link? edit

I didn't understand how it was related to this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.234.15.239 (talk) 11:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

It is a different link to a story Rummboysrc (talk) 17:06, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hayek edit

Hayek is said to be a conservative theorist. He never referred to himself as a conservative person, but rather and old whig or a liberal. I'm not sure why he would be a conservative theorist anyway. I fail to see the relevancy of this quite random citation of him being a conservative.

The claim that Hayek argues spontaneous order being "a more efficient allocation of societal resources than any design could achieve" does sound like Hayek. However, the citation points elsewhere. I'm sure one could find a direct citation from the man himself, instead of relying on second hand information. Similarly, "Centralized statistical data, they suppose, cannot convey this information because the statistics are created by abstracting away from the particulars of the situation.[12]" is worded as Hayeks argument, even though the citation points elsewhere. It should probably either be worded properly or a direct citation is needed, and maybe David Boaz could be mentioned to point this out etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.128.136.239 (talk) 00:02, 14 July 2020 (UTC)Reply