Jump to content

Talk:Thomas M. Humphrey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

COI template

[edit]
I would suggest that with your clear conflict of interest it would be advisable to post your additions here for other neutral editors to consider.Theroadislong (talk) 21:13, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Theroadislong. Please cease editing the article, Mitzi.humphrey, except for reverting obvious and indisputable vandalism. Suggest any future edits here on the talk page. I have a big problem with a lengthy quotation that lacks close quotes, and is unreferenced. That needs to be cleaned up. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:29, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, fully agree with both Theroadislong and Cullen328. Essentially, I have a big problem with the whole article, which consists in large part of undiluted WP:PUFFERY, as is typical of articles written by connected editors. A single example: I don't happen to have a copy of Torsten Gårdlund's The Life of Knut Wicksell, published in Uppsala in 1956 (translation published 1958), but I am prepared to bet real money that there is no mention in it of the economic thought of Thomas M. Humphrey, who was 21 at the time and on another continent. A question: does this demonstrate sufficient notability for inclusion of this person here? Are there any other grounds for having this article? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:01, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your comments. I like the idea of presenting any changes or additions here, since as a COI editor I cannot add directly to the article. I think the article is markedly improved since the original submission, but I won't be adding much at this point. I'd like for other economists and historians of economic thought to submit to the article, but I don't think that is happening. As for the Torsten Gardlund book, Justlettersandnumbers (talk), I do have a copy of it signed by Mr. Gardlund and also all the other economists invited to participate in the Knut Wicksell conference in Lund, Sweden. Tom and Mr. Gardlund were two of the speakers at that international conference. Admittedly, Mr. Gardlund was quite elderly at the time and couldn't sign his book until he had his whiskey. I think my mention of the Knut Wicksell conference was deleted at the time of the first posting of the Wikipedia COI banner. Even so, I think the Gardlund biography of Wicksell still qualifies as a reference because of Wicksell's influence on the economic thought of Thomas M. Humphrey. I also think the reference to Tom's Earhart grant at Tulane should be retrieved.Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 02:30, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, is it verboten for me to add Tom's own books and articles as footnotes to the bibliographies of other economists about whom he has written, e.g. Dennis Robertson (economist)? Or with whom he has co-authored (and still is),e.g. Richard Timberlake?Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 02:53, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So does Gårdlund's book mention Humphrey's monetary thought or not? If not, there is no possible reason to have it in the article. What would it be a reference for - that Wicksell existed? We already know that. If the book does not say that Humphrey was influenced by Wicksell then it can not be used as a source for a statement that Humphrey was influenced by Wicksell. Is that not completely clear? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:35, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, Justlettersandnumbers (talk),as you've already observed, Gardlund's book was already written before he and Tom met as Wicksell scholars at the conference in Lund, Sweden, evidence in itself that Tom was influenced by Wicksell. Since information about the conference has been deleted, I would appreciate some other, non-COI, editor at least listing Gardlund's book as an external link or suggested further reading. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 15:40, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why would anyone do that? If the book has no mention of the subject of the article, what would reading it add to our knowledge of him? Please ask at the reliable sources noticeboard or at the Teahouse if you are in doubt about this. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:46, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article Thomas M. Humphrey is in danger of link rot because no one has been keeping it up to date. Access to Tom's articles will be placed in new, more user-friendly databases, and some other online-access search engines (less user-friendly) leading to complete copies of his articles are being eliminated by the Federal Reserve Bank. I'm not sure if the switch to making the articles more accessible is system-wide or if it only applies to the 5th District banks centered in Richmond. This will necessitate more up-to-date URLs. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 15:25, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Which urls are you referring to?Theroadislong (talk) 22:18, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't sign your query about which urls, so I don't know who asked the question. If I understand the forthcoming change correctly (and I seem to have lost the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond email newsletter announcing it), it would apply to all references or links in Wikipedia and elsewhere to Thomas M. Humphrey's articles now still currently available at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond's website. There may be a transitional overlap during the switch in which his archived Federal Reserve publications may be accessed through both current and forthcoming search engines. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 22:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But where are the links in the article? Theroadislong (talk) 22:18, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check to see if they've been deleted, but the change would apply to accessing anything by him published at the Richmond Fed https://www.richmondfed.org/search/?search=Thomas+M+Humphrey&x=10&y=14 . Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 22:25, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article doesn't need any links to his papers. Wikipedia requires reliable sources independent of the subject. Theroadislong (talk) 22:32, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see this on the current Fed website . . . perhaps it will be helpful in keeping the article current. "Region Focus magazine has a new name and a new address. "The name of the Richmond Fed's economics magazine has changed to Econ Focus. Please follow this link to its new address and update your bookmarks: Econ Focus." If this is not independent enough, then so be it. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 13:08, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But there are NO links to "Richmond Fed" in the article to change? Theroadislong (talk) 13:28, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For example, Theroadislong, look at the first reference footnote in the article, written by an unidentified interviewing editor of a Federal Reserve publication. It falls in the category, I should think, of a reference one would want to keep for the Wikipedia article and does not lead directly to anything written by Thomas M. Humphrey himself. Falling into this category would be other articles referring to him in either text and footnotes, or both, by authors (some of whom may know him or his work personally and some who may not) in Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond and system-wide Federal Reserve publications.
[1] is a (perhaps not current) explanation about the Federal Reserve Publications. If Federal Reserve references are inappropriate, then perhaps someone should add sections such as "Bibliography" or "For Further Reading."  The names, URLs, and editorial staffs of the various Fed research publications are always subject to change. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 19:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but it's not at all clear what you are proposing, the first ref "http://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/region_focus/2004/fall/pdf/interview.pdf" is working fine. Are you suggesting that it will be changed in the future? What do want me to do specifically? Theroadislong (talk) 19:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Theroadislong, that is what I am suggesting, and I am unsure about which specific references may be changed. When I have more information about the new search engines for the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond and possibly the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, I'll try to remember to post it here. I won't be able to do the changes myself as a COI editor. Thank you for your recent edit in the article giving a more specific and neutral tone. I notice that articles for some living economists have sections for "Publications." Do you think that would be a good idea for this article? Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 23:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I checked, and the T.M. Humphrey article already has a "Publications" section. However, it has text about his publications, not a list of them. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 02:15, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In which case it clearly doesn't need a list as well. Theroadislong (talk) 08:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please remove the comma after Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond in the second sentence of the introduction to the article. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 04:03, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
COI editors are free to make non-substantive edits without any issue. You can do spelling or grammar corrections, for sure. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 12:19, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Stevie is the man! Talk. I removed the comma and called it a minor edit. I'm actually quite fearful of treading here. It's hard being BOLD on Wikipedia.Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 14:52, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some non-COI citations that could be entered by non-COI editors if you can access the articles in the New Palgrave Dictionary.

Throughout its long history, monetary economics has been concerned with the role of money in exchange, with what determines the purchasing power of money, ...

By Robert W. Dimand. From The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Second Edition, 2008 2. NATURAL RATE AND MARKET RATE OF INTEREST The terms ‘natural rate’ and ‘market rate’ of interest were introduced by Wicksell (1898; 1906) to denote an equilibrium value and the actual value of ...

By Axel Leijonhufvud. From The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Second Edition, 2008 3. MACROECONOMICS, ORIGINS AND HISTORY OF Macroeconomics, the analysis of economic aggregates, became a recognized field with Keynes's General Theory (1936) and its mathematical and diagrammatic ...

By Robert W. Dimand. From The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Second Edition, 2008 Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 17:00, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not remotely clear what any of these citations could be used for in the article? Theroadislong (talk) 16:32, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To cite or quote in Wikipedia from neutral discussions about Thomas M. Humphrey's monetary economics. I think you would have to access and read the articles in the New Palgrave, either online or in a library. Perhaps someone else will find it helpful in their research? Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 17:11, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just looked at an online source for which no special registration or password is needed. It is the webpage of a Dr. Furfero, a professor at St.John's University who has used Tom's original econmetric drawings to illustrate her text. The website is www.drfurfero.com. She has appropriately attributed the images to Tom and his articles. These would be appropriate images to use in the article Thomas M. Humphrey and also in Econometric model. Would the best approach be to submit them to Wikimedia Commons?http://www.drfurfero.com/books/mandf/ch09.html Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 21:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't use references on the talk page is very confusing. The website you link to is an absolute mess so I can't see what it is you are referring to? If you own the copyright to the illustrations you could upload them but I don't see what purpose that would serve? Theroadislong (talk) 21:52, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.richmondfed.org/publications/research/region_focus/about/

2016-2017 update to Talk info

[edit]

Comment If you check the "Scholar" link on the list of sources for Wikipedia documentation you will find many third-party references to Thomas M. Humphrey. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 14:47, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Here is a link to an article with text about Thomas M. Humphrey's writing about Marshallian cross diagrams. It is illustrated with Humphrey's own original diagrams. [1]--Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 21:41, 22 June 2017 (UTC) The author of the article is Daniel Little.--Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 21:51, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Here is an updated link to the search engine for Federal Reserve citations or articles related to Thomas M. Humphrey. [2] Simply follow this reference link and type Thomas M. Humphrey in the search box. --Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 22:10, 22 June 2017 (UTC) When I do this I see 448 results. Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 22:15, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thomas M. Humphrey served as an Advisory Board member of HOPE (the journal of the History of Political Economy) based at Duke University from 1985-1988.[3] Mitzi.humphrey (talk) 14:49, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done You have listed various references but have given no clue as to what content you wish to be added? Theroadislong (talk) 15:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Little, Daniel (22 May 2011). "Understanding Society: More on figures and diagrams in economics". Understanding Society. Retrieved 22 June 2017.
  2. ^ "Search - Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond". www.richmondfed.org. Retrieved 22 June 2017.
  3. ^ Hoover, Kevin. "Past Advisory Board Members" (PDF). HOPE. Retrieved 23 June 2017.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Thomas_M._Humphrey&oldid=1207668787"