text:
Talk:Thorstein Veblen

Rewrite
The latest rewrite was constructed by leading Veblen scholars, including Anne Mayhew and other members of the Association For Evolutionary Economics. It is much more accurate and comprehensive than the previous entry, so it should please Veblen scholars. Please contact me if you have any concerns. User: InstyProf. Date: March 14, 2007 InstyProf 16:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite?
The following text is visible if you try to edit this article:

 * These two paragraphs come from the entry for Evolutionary Economics. Please edit them, or replace them.

Does this mean I can delete these two paragraphs and rewrite this entire entry (with appropriate sources) without someone yelling at me for mass deletion? --L. 13:43, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Biographical Info?
Thorstein Veblen was an interesting guy, but there's not much biographical information on him here. If someone knows about him, it would be nice if she up a section on it.

Language?
What on earth is a "valuational principle?" That's only one of the intrusions of jargon here. Frankly, this article needs a fair deal done to make it truly readable.

 * I agree. An early paragraph reads like an example from Orwell's "Politics and the English Language." 24.210.204.102 (talk) 21:52, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

 * well that's fitting for an article on Veblen Burkander 20:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Ayresian Dichotomy
Contrary to popular belief, the Veblenian dichotomy is not between the technological and ceremonial. It is between business and industry. The former was emphasized by Ayres and has become incorrectly associated with the Veblenian dichotomy. Now, I know most (people who claim to be) followers of Veblen accept the incorrect notion of the veblenian dichotomy, so its probably against wikipedia's customs to go and change it completely. However, it should be mentioned that some hold the opposing view. William M. Dugger, one of those who rightly considers the Veblenian dichotomy to be business/industry has won the Veblen-Commons award, a sure sign that this correct view is becoming more common amongst Veblenites. The talk page indicates this entry is getting rewritten. So I won't change it now, but this should probably be considered by whoever rewrites the article. (Unsigned comment from User:65.35.245.89 03:31, 8 March 2006)

 * Actually, you are wrong. Veblen's dichotomy is an instinct dichotomy between the instinct of workmanship and the predatory animus. The instincts are created during a process of evolution (mostly LaMarckian, but also natural selection), and were established during different periods in a conjectural history presented by Velben. In the current period (the machine age), it happens that the instinct of workmanship corresponds to industry, and the predatory animus corresponds to business, so that version of the dichotomy applies only to a specific historical moment. The two poles of the dichotomy are also apparent in many other oppositions in the current period (not just industry/business), such as an occupational dichotomy with one side containing ecclesiastical, legal, and military occupations, and the other side containing scientists, handicraftsmen, and engineers.

 * By the 1940s, instincts were an archaic concept in social science, and Ayres tried to reframe the dichotomy without instincts, using ideas from John Dewey on instrumental reasoning. Whence his version of the dichotomy, which in the instrumental/ceremonial form is fairly general and quite close to Veblen's view. Bill Dugger, like Veblen, is a socialist (he might not like that label) and he is attracted to Veblen's dichotomy precisely because it seems to rip the veils off of the activities of businessmen, giving credit for our standard of living to skilled workers. I consider his view to be limited to the present period and to have its roots in praxis (that is, an attempt to use Veblen to reshape the world in a better way). I'll write on this as I get time. Anthon.Eff 21:43, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Mencken
Does Mencken--a guy who satirized everything and never meant what he said--really deserve credit as an important critic of Veblen? Sure, the contribution by User: Idols of Mud is well-written (and provides a source!), but the whole point of the critique appears to be that Veblen (the Minnesota peasant) has less knowledge of a cow's backside than Mencken (the Baltimore burger), a critique so obviously absurd that it becomes amusing--Mencken's intended effect. Actually, this whole article is kind of a train wreck, but this section about Mencken only makes it worse. Anthon.Eff 15:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

 * New edit deletes this critique. You are correct, it serves no purpose and distracts from the main points of such a page.  InstyProf 00:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Major rewrite
InstyProf deleted all of the references in the previous text. I reintroduced them, and added a few more that I was sure of. I also removed a few of his statements. I removed the assertion that Peirce was an important influence on Veblen--unsupported by the biographical sources (check Dorfman), and hard to substantiate by pointing to any specific ideas in Veblen. I also removed some editorializing that didn't seem encyclopedic. Some of InstyProf's statements don't seem correct and I inserted a Fact tag to signal that I will remove these if a citation doesn't appear. Otherwise, I think InstyProf is doing good work and am glad that he's here. --Anthon.Eff 14:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

 * How formal does the citation need to be? Is it enough to attribute the statements that you flagged as "According to ____ ____", and then to insert the living person who made the statement, given that the living person is a well-resepected Veblen scholar?  Or does it have to be a formal citation to a published article?  Thanks much for your help!!!!  InstyProf 16:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Here is the "official" policy: Attribution. --Anthon.Eff 18:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Here are some reponses to your edits.

(1) There is no simple citation to show Peirce's influence on Veblen. So, let's get rid of that. It's widely accepted by many Veblen scholars, but it's probably not crucial. (2) You asked for a citation for the following paragraph: "In 1906, he received an appointment at Stanford University, where he left, it is often written, because of “womanizing.” Though the myth lives on, it seems more likely that rumors that had followed him from the University of Chicago where difficulties with his eccentric first wife had led some to see him, probably wrongly, as a roué, were used to help terminate the employment of a man, equally eccentric, who was widely regarded as a poor teacher and a radical critic." The citation for this argument is the book by Elizabeth Watkins Jorgensen and Henry Irven Jorgensen, _Thorstein Veblen: Victorian Firebrand_, M.E. Sharpe (April 1999), Chaps. 14 - 18. It might be best to remove the last four words and end the sentence with a period after teacher. Although Jorgensen and Jorgensen imply unhappiness over Veblen's lack of intellectual conformity they much more directly say that it was his eccentric dress and poor teaching that cost him support that might have saved him when his first wife came and mounted her attack. But Jorgensen and Jorgensen do provide powerful evidence that Veblen was not the sexual adventurer that he has been thought. (3) "In this work Veblen argued that consumption is used as a way to gain and signal status, but he also argued that all consumption is culturally determined and is used to signal identification with a group. [ citation needed]" The latter part of this sentence is also widely accepted by Veblen scholars, but there is no simple citation, and to establish the truth of the last clause requires a longer argument than is appropriate for Wikipedia. So let's just put a period after "signal status" and leave out the last clause. I hope these changes are acceptable. If so, I'll make them when I get a chance. Thanks, InstyProf 20:06, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I went ahead and made your suggested changes, removing the tags. Thanks! --Anthon.Eff 13:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Addition of reference to "differential accumulation"
Recently, the following text was added to the Veblen page: "Some unaligned practitioners include theorists of the concept of "differential accumulation"." Given that this is not a widely known concept or group, as opposed to a large, official scholarly body such as the Association For Evolutionary Economics (AFEE), is it appropriate to have such a reference on this page? My initial inclination would be to remove this reference. Any thoughts? InstyProf 18:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with you: very obscure indeed. I would support removing this (also very little external sources for article "differential accumulation", only the authors' archives - dubious....) Robertsch55 13:30, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Differential accumulation is an important contribution in International Relations and International Political Economy and has been published in several major refereed journals and university presses. I would support changing the text to "Veblen's work has been influential in the institutional analyses of International Political Economy, and is credited as the basis of the concept "differential accumulation"" Dreddly (talk) 11:54, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

University of Texas
I'm curious what Veblen's connection to UT is, i.e. why this article is part of WikiProject University of Texas at Austin. The word "Texas" does not appear in the article. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 22:17, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree, the connection is somewhat strained, but it must be due to the fact that the economics department at Texas was dominated for many years by Clarence Ayres who can be considered one of the most important "followers" of Veblen. --Anthon.Eff 03:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

When born?
Was he born 1857-07-30 (in text) or 1857-10-30 (in infobox)? Nsaa 22:12, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

 * He was born July 30 (Dorfman 1934: 3). Thanks for making the correction! --Anthon.Eff 12:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

In the article on Thorstein Veblen, the mathematician, Oswald Veblen, is cited as being Thorstein's nephew.

However, in the Wikipedia article on Oswald Veblen, Thorstein is mentioned as being is brother.

There is obviously an inconsistency.... that is, one of the articles in wrong on this point.

132.66.222.116 (talk) 22:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Birthplace
This citation indicates he was born in Valders, WI, not Cato, WI as indicated in the article. Do we know which source is correct? -- Zim Zala Bim talk  02:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

 * According to Dorfman (page 6), Veblen was born in Cato township (which, like Valders, is in Manitowoc County). Valders was the name of the valley in Norway his parents emigrated from, so obviously they had a certain affinity for Valders, WI, but their farm was within the boundaries of Cato.--Anthon.Eff (talk) 02:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

 * Thx. I've removed mention of him from the Valders article. -- Zim Zala Bim talk  03:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Technocracy
Is there any reason for more than a cursory mention of Technocracy in this article? I'm trimming per WP:weight, but an IP keeps reverting. LK (talk) 02:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The proper application of WP:WEIGHT here would be in terms of how “reliable” sources on Veblen treated his associations with Technocracism. How much attention contemporary “reliable” sources on economic subjects more generally apply to Technocracism is nearly irrelevant to the application of WP:WEIGHT to an article on Veblen himself. (If few “reliable” sources on Veblen treated his associations with Technocracism as significant, then WP:WEIGHT would argue against much discussion even if overt Technocracism dominated modern economic thought.) —SlamDiego←T 10:00, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The source which is currently being used seems to be, "The Technocrats 1919-1967: A Case Study of Conflict in a Social Movement". It looks like that's really supposed to be "The Technocrats 1919-1967: A Case Study of Conflict and Change in a Social Movement". Only place I find that is this PDF, which is a Master's thesis. A thesis, otherwise unpublished, isn't generally considered a RS is it? Has this been published elsewhere? C RETOG 8(t/c) 14:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * So far I haven't found any hints the author was later published, or that the thesis has been widely cited (other than on Wikipedia). It might be ok if there's a wide consensus among editors but without later published work in that field by the author, citations of it in other published works or independent publication of the thesis itself, no, this wouldn't be taken as a relaible source here. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:22, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * That's not the only source over which there has been conflict.
 * Robert adds Bell (American Scholar) as cited in Tilman (Princeton University Press)
 * Lawrencekhoo reverts it, claiming “Per wp:weight”
 * Robert restores Bell
 * Robert makes three more edits (consolidated), resulting in the use of Adair
 * Lawrencekhoo removes Adair, saying “rm fringe”
 * Adair might not qualify as a “reliable” source, but that's a matter of WP:RS, not of WP:WEIGHT. WP:WEIGHT cannot properly be invoked here at all, and WP:RS cannot be invoked to remove Bell, especially as Robert made it plain that what was being expressed was Bell's opinion. —SlamDiego←T 14:40, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * It's tricky tracking down those sources. If Tilman is being used as a ref, then it should provide a page number. The two questions I see in regards to weight are (1) is the statement in the source a toss-off, a tiny piece of a big work? and (2) is the fact that a notable scholar (I don't know Bell myself, but giving his notability the benefit of the doubt) "sees an affinity between" a person and a movement a real enough connection to merit mention. To me it seems pushing it, but I'd want to see the actual context before judging either way. C RETOG 8(t/c) 14:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Clearly the desirability of a page number is not properly addressed by deleting the passage and reference and invoking WP:WEIGHT. (And I'd rather not see Tilman used at all, since it's only being used to get to Bell.)
 * Bell also discusses the relationship between Veblen and the Technocracy movement in an introduction to The Engineers and the Price System. I wouldn't know whether the statement in the cited article were a “toss-off”, but the discussion in that introduction is not.
 * One can find scholars other than Bell who discuss how Veblen can be read as offering the same or similar ideas to those of the Technocracy movement, and how the founders of that movement pointed to Veblen as a principal influence. —SlamDiego←T 15:24, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

The Britannica article on Veblen (which is longer that ours) has only one mention of technocracy; it is at the end of a paragraph about his later works. "Another series of articles that appeared in The Dial was later published in the book The Engineers and the Price System (1921). In these pieces Veblen developed his ideas for reform of the economic system. He believed that engineers, who had the knowledge to run industry, should take over its direction because they would manage it for efficiency instead of profit. This theme was central to the brief Depression-era movement known as “technocracy.”"

It makes no claim that Veblen was ever part of the technocracy movement, rather the technocracy movement took their ideas from him. LK (talk) 14:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * The Britannica does not use the same policies as does Wikipedia. Nor does the Wikipedia article claim that Veblen was part of the Technocracy movement.  Rather, it claims that Veblen was part of what was to become the Technocratic movement (which claim needs a “reliable” source) and that “ Daniel Bell sees an affinity between Veblen and the Technocracy movement” (which claim has a “reliable” source). —SlamDiego←T 14:45, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Which came first, tecnocracy or Veblen? That may be like asking who came first, radical communist feminists who hate high heels on women, or Veblen, who as I recall claimed that high heels were torture devices beloved of degenerate capitalists who liked showing off their excess, unproductive human chattel (women). So far as I'm aware, WP:WEIGHT says nothing about Britannica articles. However, I think the Adair source can be skived by any editor as not meeting RS. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:55, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * As it turns out, Bell (in his introduction to The Engineers and the Price System) seems to support a claim that Veblen wasn't really consulted on his membership in the Technical Alliance. He may simply have been co-opted.  So the claim being supported by reference to Adair is especially problematic. —SlamDiego←T 15:24, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Whenever I hear the word technocrat, I think of Bob McNamara. For what it's worth, the more I hear about the Adair, the less I like it. Gwen Gale (talk) 15:30, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * The Adair reference seems fine. A Master's thesis which is well-referenced is a fine source for basic scholarship like this, and likely better than journal and newspaper articles which are written under much tighter deadlines. Adair, however, doesn't say that Veblen was a member of the Technical Alliance or the Technocracy. He isn't even clear as to whether Veblen joined the New Machine, an organization which preceded the Technical Alliance. Adair just says that there was a link (page 18). Veblen was associated with the founder of the New Machine, taught at the New School, and wrote a set of articles for the Dial which became his notable The Engineers and the Price System book. That's all worth including in the article. II  | (t - c) 18:47, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Just to note it in case I come back to it, or someone else wants to, currently Google Books has the full text of Bell's introduction to Veblen's book (as SlamDiego mentions above) here. Bell certainly thinks that something about the relationship is notable, but it still has an almost gossipy quality about it, so I don't know how I'd phrase things myself. C RETOG 8(t/c) 22:36, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

 * I was working on editing and moving this to Veblen's biography:

 * Veblen proposes a soviet of engineers in one chapter in The Engineers and the Price System . According to Yngve Ramstad, this work's view that engineers, not workers, would overthrow capitalism was a "novel view". Veblen invited Guido Marx to the New School to teach and to help organize a movement of engineers, by such as Morris Cooke; Henry Laurence Gantt, who had died shortly before; and Howard Scott. Howard Scott then listed Veblen as on the temporary organizing committee of the Technical Alliance, perhaps without consulting Veblen or other listed members. The Technical Alliance, created in 1918-1919, would later become the Technocracy movement. . Daniel Bell sees an affinity between Veblen and the Technocracy movement.

 * And then I found I couldn't because of some protection on the page imposed by Gwen Gale. Perhaps I was not clear in my reversion summary that I intended to do something further. -- RLV 209.217.195.122 (talk) 19:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 * There was no need to save a reverted version in order to use it as a basis for such edits.
 * Given that his induction into the Technical Alliance appears to have been involuntary, it is not immediately clear why it should be mentioned in this article. It would plainly make sense to mention the membership if he could be shown to have embraced the membership or to have subsequently acted as a member, or significantly been treated as member by broader expanses of society.  Beyond that, it might be better to instead note less convoluted instances of where Veblen was identified as a precursor, fellow traveler, or whatever of Technocratism. —SlamDiego←T 05:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Who said anything about "need"? I was interested in saving the reference string - with the WP markup - before modifying. The changes I was making reflected the discussion here, and I found another reference that could replace the Adair reference if one doesn't like it. Since I was not edit warring and am certainly not a sock, can somebody remove the protection?

 * Technocracy does not relate to Veblen merely by some vague similarity of ideas. The point is one of the founders, Scott, was part of the group Veblen was trying to get together around his time at the New School to found a movement of engineers. This history of organizations is notable and sourced. (By the way, that Henry Laurence Gantt I mention is the creator of Gantt charts.) So there is somebody else of interest in that milieu. And Daniel Bell, a later writer on the connection between Veblen and Technocracy, is definitely notable for the reasons given in his entry. (It helps to know something about post war public intellectuals in the US to understand Bell's notability.) -- RLV 209.217.195.150 (talk) 09:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

 * That string was already saved, with an earlier edit. What you did was to restore it, even after it had been seen to be problematic.  Your claim was that this was part of a process of effecting the passage that you present above, but the restoration did not serve towards effecting that passage.  Your conduct was indistinguishable from edit warring, and needlessly disruptive in any case.
 * The issue that has been the subject of remaining contention has been Veblen's association (initially and perhaps always involuntary) with the Technical Alliance. Veblen's attempt to assemble a group at the New School is another matter.  It remains unclear why this article should mention Veblen's induction into the Technical Alliance. —SlamDiego←T 10:04, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Clearly I am not a sock. A version of the disputed passage, albeit unsourced, was in the biography section of a 14 March version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thorstein_Veblen&oldid=115080143. That version was written by leading Veblen scholars, including Anne Mayhew: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Thorstein_Veblen&diff=prev&oldid=115076661. The edit summary for the disputed reversion describes that as a "version to edit": http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thorstein_Veblen&diff=325668674&oldid=325634751. The additional editing was described on this talk page less than 20 minutes later: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Thorstein_Veblen&diff=325671699&oldid=325663563. Those changes 20 minutes later contained wikipedia markup from the reversion, albeit improved as suggested by comments from Cretog on 13 November 2009. No disruption would have even been visible to somebody that had not looked at the article in those 20 minutes. The edit summary on the imposition of page protection incorrectly describes the disputed reversion as being by an "edit-warring sock": http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thorstein_Veblen&diff=325670114&oldid=325670032. Would a responsible party please remove the protection? -- RLV 209.217.195.158 (talk) 11:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Whether you are to be counted as using socks (and under what definition of “sock”) is secondary to the issue of edit warring. If Gwen Gale had seen the offense as abuse of socks per se, then she likely would have range blocked you.
 * Had you merely wanted to use that previous version as a basis, you could have begun editing from that version without restoring it at all, let alone for 20 minutes. (Nor should an editor or admin be expected to guess that the improperly restored version would stand for only an interval of $$T$$, whether $$T$$ be 20 minutes or something else.) The edit summary of “version to edit” was not merely unhelpful but tied the restoration to an untenable justification. —SlamDiego←T 11:49, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

 * I don't see why anybody should care about Gwen Gale's reasons for her mistake or my mastery of WP's interface. -- RLV 209.217.195.133 (talk) 20:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It isn't established that Gwen Gale made any mistake here. And your action wasn't plausibly a result of not knowing how to effect the subsequent edit without restoring the old version. —SlamDiego←T 01:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

 * ImperfectlyInformed, the reason that I keep putting “reliable” in quotation marks is that Wikipedia insists on using its own damned language, taking its vocabulary from English but then changing the meanings. What you and I might agree are reliable sources don't necessarily pass WP:RS, and therefore don't count as “reliable” sources.
 * WP:RS does specifically accept doctoral dissertations, and gives some explanation for their acceptance. It is silent on masters' theses, but the rationale for accepting dissertations would be far less applicable to theses. —SlamDiego←T 05:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

 * WP:RS is just a list of examples of things that are pretty good. It's up to the editors to decide what's reliable or not. I don't see anyone making a good argument that Adair is a bad source. Nobody has identified any errors in it, and it is carefully referenced. Why would doctoral dissertations be so much more reliable than Master's thesis? Anyway, the current sentence looks sufficient:"Veblen proposes a soviet of engineers in one chapter in The Engineers and the Price System[8]. According to Yngve Ramstad[9], this work's view that engineers, not workers, would overthrow capitalism was a 'novel view'. Daniel Bell sees an affinity between Veblen and the Technocracy movement[10]" II  | (t - c) 23:20, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

 * WP:RS isn't just a list; it's policy. And while it is indeed up to editors to decide was is “reliable”, it is up to the editors of Wikipedia in general, rather than simply those working on a specific article (or even those who have declared relevant WikiProjects).  The policy is to require, amongst other things, that a source be “published”, with doctoral dissertations specifically counted as “published” for reasons that happen to be far less applicable to masters' theses.  Again, you and I might agree that Adair were reliable; that doesn't make it “reliable”.
 * I agree that the current passage looks sufficient. —SlamDiego←T 02:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Reliable sources technically isn't "policy", it's a "content guideline". Ignore all rules is "policy". And no, Wikipedia is definitely not top-down, it is bottom-up. Particular situations trump general guidelines, as emphasized by WP:IAR. Also, why would a doctoral dissertation be considered published more than a master's thesis? II  | (t - c) 02:24, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You're right on the status of WP:RS; thanks. (Such distinctions are genuinely important.) However, my principal point is that it goes beyond being just a list. WP:IAR is indeed policy, but its appropriate application, again, is determined by the wider community, rather than just those working on a given article or set of articles.  That's not to say that the whole community has to explicitly participate in each discussion, but that each discussion should be informed by what the community has said.  If one really wants to use a master's thesis here, one should in theory be able to persuade the community at WP:RS that the guideline could reasonably be expanded to included theses.  Doctoral dissertations go through a more careful process of review; and dissertations are fairly often cited in sources considered “reliable”, whereas theses almost never are. —SlamDiego←T 02:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

 * This is getting into a tangent, but we'll have to agree to disagree on what IAR means and whether RS is a comprehensive list. I don't think Wikipedia is managed top-down and I think that's why IAR exists - the situations for Wikipedia are too diverse for a tight set of rules. I don't think it's even helpful to talk about "the community" as if it's a monolithic, discrete body with opinions. There's usually a shifting handful of people watching policy page; I don't really think of these people as "the community". These people would probably object to explicitly adding master's theses to WP:RS, but that doesn't mean such sources aren't good, or that they should be removed on sight. It's a general editorial decision. II  | (t - c) 07:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not suggesting that there is some monolithic entity which may be called “the community”. The fact is that Wikipedia is, for good or for worse, a communal endeavor, and if its community wants something to go in some way that they can effect, it does.  Any given individual who significantly bucks that is likely to be expelled, and if a large party buck it then Wikipedia is likely to degenerate into a free-for-all BBS (which, at times, may seem better than what it often is, but that's another matter).  And, again, I'm not arguing that the source in question isn't reliable; I'm arguing that it's not “reliable”.  You and I might find considerable agreement on genuine reliability. —SlamDiego←T 08:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

 * The current sentence is insufficient for reasons I have already given. It suggests similar ideas, but doesn't get at the personal and organizational connections between Veblen and one of the founders of Technocracy. (One doesn't need to argue about the reliability of Adair, this is all in Bell - and Bell is referenced in the suggested change above.) According to the scholarly literature (Knoedler and Mayhew 1999), Scholars find it notable for Veblen to offer any advocacy or predictions whatsover and account for this case by his association with these engineers while at the new school. By the way, Morris Cooke and H. L. Gantt were followers of Taylor's Scientific Management, which should be noted too. And the whole paragraph could be moved to biography, which is where the expert rewrite first had the mention of Technocracy. -- RLV 209.217.195.135 (talk) 04:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

 * I don't have problem with the idea of noting personal connections to Technocrats (especially if this is in the more overtly biographical section). I believe that ImperfectlyInformed was writing of sufficiency for the “intellectual legacy” section, and I know that I was.
 * My continuing problem is with treating his membership in the Technical Alliance as significant. Years ago, I had friends who discovered that they could incorporate a non-profit in Ohio and make anyone whom they wished an officer ex-officio, without permission of that person.  In no cases should that particular non-profit be mentioned in the Wikipedia articles on any of those inductees.  And I don't (so far) see any reason to mention the Technical Alliance in the biography here of Veblen. —SlamDiego←T 05:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

 * I tend to agree with Slam here. The Technocracy connection could be mentioned, but if people are really interested they can read Bell. II  | (t - c) 07:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

You may be interested but Theses which are available for consultation (ie, held by an academic library for universal borrowing, or distributed by microfilm or web) are now considered reliable sources. They would of course need to come from a real university. Fifelfoo (talk) 10:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That will at least partially resolve the concern here. Thanks. —SlamDiego←T 11:07, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

semi-protection
209.217x is asking that I lift the semi-protection (early). Shall I? Gwen Gale (talk) 12:11, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

 * I think whatever edit-warring was happening was slo-mo enough that we can risk it happening again. Lift the protection. C RETOG 8(t/c) 14:57, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Please remove the page protection. -- RLV 209.217.195.135 (talk) 08:30, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Ritz
Veblen may have loved ritz crackers, but there's no way he ate them every single day of his life.

147.9.203.144 (talk) 16:15, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Actually, Ritz Crackers weren't introduced until something like five years after his death. —SlamDiego←T 18:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Inappropriate language
"Experts complained his ideas, while brilliantly presented, were crude, gross, fuzzy, and imprecise; others complained he was a wacky eccentric"

Seriously? A) source for "experts", B) "wacky excentric"? Also, in what way would an economist/sociologist's ideas be "gross"? Is the minute (if any) difference between "fuzzy" and "imprecise" so important that it merits inclusion of both? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.23.230.135 (talk) 03:51, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Ignorance of Thorstein Veblen
"Ignorance of Thorstein Veblen" is the title of a section of Chapter 1 (Thinking the Unthinkable) of Michael Dawson's brilliant work, "The Consumer Trap: Big Business Marketing in American Life". In this work, Dawson quotes C. Wright Mills who called Veblen "the best critic of America that America has produced". This aspect of Veblen's work - as a trenchant and brilliant critic of the sinister and nefarious influence of big business marketing on American life - is curiously missing entirely from this Wikipedia article. It's as I've always said - Wikipedia has a disgusting right-wing bias that makes many of its articles less than worthless. "The real core of Veblen's now-forgotten theory of corporate salesmanship was his view that big business marketing was neither more nor less than a new embodiment of class coercion. While other thinkers of his day were developing early versions of the end of history thesis, Veblen insisted that business society's new class of owners relied just as much on arbitrary carrots and sticks as did prior ruling elites." See pp. 11-14 of Dawson's book for more. I wonder how long it will take for this contribution to be erased? lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgi Plekhanov (talk • contribs) 05:37, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

 * If you don't like the article as it stands, then you should edit it--you have the same rights here as anyone else. Veblen's left-leaning criticism of business has not been "forgotten", by the way--most of Veblen's admirers in contemporary academic economics have adopted that critical view.--Anthon.Eff (talk) 21:41, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

NPOV
Experts complained his ideas, while brilliantly presented, were crude, gross, fuzzy, and imprecise; others complained he was a wacky eccentric. Scholars continue to debate exactly what he meant in his convoluted, ironic and satiric essays; he made heavy use of examples of primitive societies, but many examples were pure invention

Come on! This is just silly bias.
 * those are the conclusions of Gary Alan Fine, "The Social Construction of Style: Thorstein Veblen's the Theory of the Leisure Class as Contested Text" Sociological Quarterly 1994 35(3): 457-472. Fine is professor of Sociology at Northwestern University; he has been President of the Midwest Sociological Society, President of the Society for the Study of Social Problems and editor of Social Psychology Quarterly, an official journal of the American Sociological Association. Rjensen (talk) 07:58, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Unexplained deletions of 18 Sept 2014
I have undone this edit because of its unexplained changes. In particular: unexplained deletion of subsection structure/title "Institutional economics", unexplained deletion of the passage on friction between "business" and "industry", unexplained deletion of internal links (Second Industrial Revolution unlinked, nouveau riche unlinked and misspelled nouveau rich [sic]), unexplained deletion of Veblen's identification of the leisure class (as those who engage in conspicuous leisure or the non-productive use of time for the sake of displaying social status), etc. It would be helpful for transparency and for permitting verification that before such major changes any passages to be deleted would first be challenged explicitly (for ex. using appropriate inline templates) and newly introduced passages would be sufficiently referenced by inline references as far as possible. --Chris Howard (talk) 07:47, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * P.S. The IP 38.111.224.133 has re-instated those changes without any further explanation, and continued editing from there. I hereby abandon the topic because it is of insufficient interest to me, but want to hereby alert readers and editors that earlier contributions have been deleted in this manner and that there is a higher risk to neutrality (WP:NPOV); for example, Veblen's identification of the leisure class as "those who engage in conspicuous leisure or the non-productive use of time for the sake of displaying social status" (as it was written in the article before, albeit without inline reference) has been deleted. There are further deletions, too, but due to the intransparent ways of editing of the IP 38.111.224.133 it would be a lot of work to identify them one by one. --Chris Howard (talk) 07:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

As a result of recent editing by 38.111.224.133, huge portions of this article are now unsourced original research. 32.218.37.157 (talk) 18:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No-- when summarizing the content of a book, the book itself is all the reference that is needed. That is standard Wikipedia policy. Rjensen (talk) 04:19, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The editor who has been adding so much unsourced content isn't summarizing the content of a book, s/he's giving a personal interpretation of Veblen's writing. Here are a few examples of original research:
 * "Veblen was sympathetic to state ownership of industry"
 * "Veblen laid the foundation for the perspective of institutional economics"
 * "While economic institutionalism never transformed into a major school of economic thought, it allowed economists to explore economic problems from a perspective that incorporated social and cultural phenomena."
 * "The central problem for Veblen was..."
 * "Probably the clearest inheritors of Veblen's ideas that humans are not rationally pursuing value and utility through their conspicuous consumption are adherents of the school of behavioral economics"
 * All involve unsourced opinion and interpretation, not summarization. 32.218.37.157 (talk) 04:33, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * is the problem a) mistaken statements or b) not enough footnotes. All that material is in Dorfman & other standard sources--none is actually "original." Rjensen (talk) 04:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Articles
Veblen's articles were highly influential and reached most of the active economists and sociologists the country, who subscribe to QJE, JPE etc. I can imagine why anyone would like to delete them?? Rjensen (talk) 11:49, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No argument is made to dispute their influence. But to have a list of all his articles without analysis or comment doesn't add any benefit to the article. Why not provide a link to a bibliography or author page in the external links? Or write some prose about more influential pieces and improve the article? See these similar pages for economists which did not require an exhaustive reporting of their minor publications: John Maurice Clark, John R. Commons, Robert A. Brady. Musicandnintendo (talk) 14:40, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Inconsistent Claims About Extramarital Affairs
The "Academic Career" section implies that Veblen had extramarital affairs:

But the "Marriages" section is skeptical of that idea:

discussion on 'socially determined'
Is 'determined' about Cause and effect aka ? Is this 'Social determinism'? (One may find it difficult to believe that Veblen asserted that social groups, communities etc, (rather than individuals' decisions, volitions, etc,) are the sole cause of individual actions.) Or, rather than etiology, is he talking about, in which Veblen is opposed to the mere which involves analysing individuals but not groups? Anyway, m.i. was popular in the Neoclassical economics which Veblen in that same paragraph disavowed, according to its own page. FatalSubjectivities (talk) 07:41, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Thorstein Veblen


text:
If I Was Your Girlfriend

"If I Was Your Girlfriend" is a song by American singer and songwriter Prince. The song serves as the second single from his ninth studio album Sign o' the Times (1987). The single was a hit in the UK (#20) but was only a minor hit in America (#67) but a major hit on black radio in America. It was originally from the Camille album, which was to be released under the guise of Prince's alter ego named Camille.

The song is delivered from an androgynous male perspective to a woman, wherein Prince explores the possibilities of a more intimate relationship if he were his lover's platonic girlfriend. Trouser Press names the song as one of the album's highlights, noting that it "redefines a relationship in a surprisingly mature way." It is believed that "If I Was Your Girlfriend" deals with the jealousy Prince felt at the close bond shared between then girlfriend/fiancée Susannah Melvoin with her twin sister Wendy.

Musically, the song features Prince's pitched-up, androgynous vocals over a sparse bass and drum machine pattern, punctuated by a keyboard line. The opening seconds include a sound collage that includes an orchestra tuning up, a salesman and a sample of Felix Mendelssohn's "Wedding March". According to engineer Susan Rogers, a rare technical error on her part led to distortion—albeit only on certain words. Yet after hearing the playback, Prince loved the effect, which is featured on the released version.

The song was released on May 6, 1987, and reached number 67 on the US Billboard Hot 100 but was more successful on the US Billboard Hot Black Singles reaching number 12. It was little more successful in the UK, reaching number 20.

Track listings
7" single
 * A. "If I Was Your Girlfriend" (edit) – 3:46
 * B. "Shockadelica" – 3:30

12" single
 * A. "If I Was Your Girlfriend" – 4:54
 * B. "Shockadelica" (extended version) – 6:12

Personnel
Credits from Duane Tudahl and Benoît Clerc
 * Prince – lead and backing vocals, Fairlight CMI, Prophet VS, bass guitar, Linn LM-1, Publison IM90 Infernal Machine

"Shockadelica"
The B-side to the track was another "Camille" track, "Shockadelica". The track was actually written in response to an album of the same name by former Time member, Jesse Johnson. Prince heard Johnson's album before its release, and commented that a great album should have a great title track. Johnson disagreed, so Prince recorded the track and had it played on a Minneapolis radio station before the release of Johnson's album. The public perception would be that Johnson was copying Prince's idea, and this caused tension between Johnson and Prince.

When the "Camille" project was scrapped in favor of Crystal Ball, "Shockadelica" again made the cut, but was deleted from the track list when the set was trimmed to Sign o' the Times. The track was released as a B-side, and later on The Hits/The B-Sides.

Cover versions

 * "If I Was Your Girlfriend" was covered on the TLC album, CrazySexyCool, released in 1994, and on their FanMail Tour.
 * The song was covered by Eels during their tours of 1997 and 1998. Their version was made commercially available on their 2008 rarities compilation Useless Trinkets: B-Sides, Soundtracks, Rarities and Unreleased 1996–2006.
 * "If I Was Your Girlfriend" was covered by Martin Rossiter, released in 2012 on a cover EP called The Defenestration of Prince and Others.
 * "If I Was Your Girlfriend" was covered by B.Slade, as "Girlfriend", on the 2012 album Stunt B%$@H.
 * B-side "Shockadelica" was interpolated by Ween in their track "L.M.L.Y.P.", released in 1990 on their debut album, GodWeenSatan: The Oneness.

Sampling

 * Mobb Deep sampled the song on their 1996 pre-Hell on Earth song "Young Luv".
 * Chicano rapper Lil Rob samples "If I Was Your Girlfriend" on his 1997 Crazy Life album.
 * In 2003, the Jay-Z/Beyoncé Knowles single, "'03 Bonnie & Clyde" (from The Blueprint²: The Gift & the Curse) used several lines of "If I Was Your Girlfriend", and Prince was credited as one of the writers.
 * 2Pac sampled a live performance of "If I Was Your Girlfriend" for his song "Thugs Get Lonely Too"; the title is also a nod to another Prince composition called "Gigolos Get Lonely Too," performed by The Time. The song was recorded in 1993 but did not see official release until 2004, when the Prince samples were removed.
 * George Clinton sampled "If I Was Your Girlfriend" for his song, "Heaven", off of his 2008 album George Clinton and His Gangsters of Love.

Appearances in other media

 * "If I Was Your Girlfriend" and the B-side "Shockadelica" both appear in Demi Moore's 1996 film, Striptease.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: If I Was Your Girlfriend


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PUKL

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. Golbez 08:51, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

PUKL
Delete. This is a substub about a 20 year old little known Icelandic bandWAvegetarian 03:47, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * And this is only the name they once performed. Hopeless. Delete. JFW | T@lk  11:30, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as irrelevant. Karol 21:57, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.  Please do not edit this page .

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PUKL


text: User talk:69.225.34.159

title: User talk:69.225.34.159


text:
Category:Korean Confucianism

Confucianism in the Korean context, including Confucian thinkers and Confucian-influenced cultural phenomena.

title: Category:Korean Confucianism


text:
Ring oscillator

A ring oscillator is a device composed of an odd number of NOT gates in a ring, whose output oscillates between two voltage levels, representing true and false. The NOT gates, or inverters, are attached in a chain and the output of the last inverter is fed back into the first.

Details
Because a single inverter computes the logical NOT of its input, it can be shown that the last output of a chain of an odd number of inverters is the logical NOT of the first input. The final output is asserted a finite amount of time after the first input is asserted and the feedback of the last output to the input causes oscillation.

A circular chain composed of an even number of inverters cannot be used as a ring oscillator. The last output in this case is the same as the input. However, this configuration of inverter feedback can be used as a storage element and it is the basic building block of static random access memory or SRAM.

The stages of the ring oscillator are often differential stages, that are more immune to external disturbances. This renders available also non-inverting stages. A ring oscillator can be made with a mix of inverting and non-inverting stages, provided the total number of inverting stages is odd. The oscillator period is in all cases equal to twice the sum of the individual delays of all stages.

A ring oscillator only requires power to operate. Above a certain voltage, typical well below the threshold voltage of the MOSFETs used, oscillations begin spontaneously. To increase the frequency of oscillation, two methods are commonly used. First, making the ring from a smaller number of inverters results in a higher frequency of oscillation, with about the same power consumption. Second, the supply voltage may be increased. In circuits where this method can be applied, it reduces the propagation delay through the chain of stages, increasing both the frequency of the oscillation and the current consumed.

Operation

To understand the operation of a ring oscillator, one must first understand gate delay. In a physical device, no gate can switch instantaneously. In a device fabricated with MOSFETs, for example, the gate capacitance must be charged before current can flow between the source and the drain. Thus, the output of every inverter in a ring oscillator changes within a finite amount of time after the input has changed. From here, it can be easily seen that adding more inverters to the chain increases the total gate delay, reducing the frequency of oscillation.

The ring oscillator is a member of the class of time-delay oscillators. A time-delay oscillator consists of an inverting amplifier with a delay element between the amplifier output and its input. The amplifier must have a gain greater than 1 at the intended oscillation frequency. Consider the initial case where the amplifier input and output voltages are momentarily balanced at a stable point. A small amount of noise can cause the amplifier output to rise slightly. After passing through the time-delay element, this small output voltage change will be presented to the amplifier input. The amplifier has a negative gain of greater than 1, so the output will change in the direction opposite to this input voltage. It will change by an amount larger than the input value, for a gain greater than 1. This amplified and reversed signal propagates from the output through the time-delay and back to the input where it is amplified and inverted again. The result of this sequential loop is a square-wave signal at the amplifier output with the period of each half of the square wave equal to the time delay. The square wave will grow until the amplifier output voltage reaches its limits, where it will stabilize. A more exact analysis will show that the wave that grows from the initial noise may not be square as it grows, but it will become square as the amplifier reaches its output limits.

The ring oscillator is a distributed version of the time-delay oscillator. The ring oscillator uses an odd number of inverters to give the effect of a single inverting amplifier with a gain of greater than one (Although, a single inverter in a loop is stable and a ring oscillator with odd number or inverters in a loop, is not). Rather than having a single delay element, each inverter contributes to the delay of the signal around the ring of inverters, hence the name ring oscillator. Adding pairs of inverters to the ring increases the total delay and thereby decreases the oscillator frequency. Changing the supply voltage changes the delay through each inverter, with higher voltages typically decreasing the delay and increasing the oscillator frequency. Vratislav describes some methods of frequency-stability and power consumption improving of the CMOS ring-oscillator.

If t represents the time delay for a single inverter and n represents the number of inverters in the inverter chain, then the frequency of oscillation is given by:

 * $$f = {\frac{1}{2tn} }$$.

Jitter
The period of a ring oscillator varies in a random manner as T+T' where T' is a random value. In high-quality circuits, the range of T' is relatively small compared to the average period T. This variation in oscillator period is called jitter.

Local temperature effects cause the period of a ring oscillator to wander above and below the long-term average period. When the local silicon is cold, the propagation delay is slightly shorter, causing the ring oscillator to run at a slightly higher frequency, which eventually raises the local temperature. When the local silicon is hot, the propagation delay is slightly longer, causing the ring oscillator to run at a slightly lower frequency, which eventually lowers the local temperature. So, the frequency of a silicon ring oscillator will generally be stable, when the ambient temperature is constant and factors of heat transfer from the device to the ambient environment do not vary.

Applications

 * The voltage-controlled oscillator in most phase-locked loops is built from a ring oscillator.
 * Jitter of ring oscillators is commonly used in hardware random number generators.
 * A ring oscillator is sometimes used to demonstrate a new hardware technology, analogous to the way a hello world program is often used to demonstrate a new software technology.
 * Many wafers include a ring oscillator as part of the scribe line test structures. They are used during wafer testing to measure the effects of manufacturing process variations.
 * Ring oscillators can also be used to measure the effects of voltage and temperature on a chip.

title: Ring oscillator


text:
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anschluss

Anschluss
The article has been a FAC when it was not quite ready. Since then Featured article candidates/Anschluss/archive1 it has been substantially expanded and restructured. It is partly a self-nom. Wow! This has been edited quite few times, that its not even funny. Too many lines through sentences, does Wikipedia even notice this!
 * Mhhhmmmm, silence is the worst criticism... Themanwithoutapast 01:33, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I haven't forgotten you, Themanwithoutapast. I will review this FAC in a few hours. Phil s 16:11, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * It's dense. A few small things I think should be addressed while I read it in more deatils include, shortening some of the really long section headings and fixing up the notes, I think that you should remove the numbers from the notes list since they don't correspond to the numbers in the text.--nixie 02:41, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support now. Object. It has improved (longer, more pics, better language), but some of my past objections are still not adressed. References are still mixed up with external links. I don't think it is comprehensive - the appeasment is not mentioned at all, neither is Munich. On the bright side, this is not far from FA quality and I hope I can support after those points are adressed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 00:52, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I added a paragraph on the consequences and reactions part of the article concerning the British appeasement policy. I have linked those external links to the text that have some specific bearing to it. If you want more on the appeasment issue, please state so. P.S.: added some new pics. Themanwithoutapast 03:01, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It is comprehensive now, I think. I don't see references now - please read Cite sources and format this properly (i.e. create a section 'references' and copy and format positions mentioned in notes into it, also, if some external links were used as references, move accordingly). Also, I think that note on spelling (and naming - the first para) should be moved from lead into either a separate section (name) or simply to notes below. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 10:39, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * 1. references: I formatted it according to wiki-cite sources + as stated there I only included references that give an in-deep view of the subject at hand + additional reading. 2. moved the note of 'ss' and 'ß' down to notes. Themanwithoutapast 14:01, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. The intro isn't an intro to this subject, which is the Anschluss of 1938, but the current intro gives a potted history of distant events; it's also written in a dense style I think is hard to follow unless you're already familiar with the subject. Also, the notes: I'm not keen on doing it this way (though that's just a personal preference, not an objection), but is the link given in, say, the second note actually the source of the sentence or paragraph? And if so, why not place that link in the text rather than make the reader jump first to a footnote? (Again, this is just a question, not an objection, because I know others accept this way of doing footnotes. I'm asking only because I find it confusing.) SlimVirgin (talk) 09:33, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * 1. As far as I know it is not necessary to give a summary of what follows in the article, an introduction - as the term states - should be an introduction to the article and well that it is in this case. 2. dense: in what way (which paragraph or section is hard to follow?) - please eleborate or give an example so that I can fix that. 3. the footnotes: there were direct links in the text before - I prefer it that way too - however it was critizised last time this article was a FAC and therefore changed. Themanwithoutapast 12:45, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I see no need to launch into Ausschluss in the second sentence of the intro. The intro should highlight the most notable points about the Anschluss of 1938, and give the reader a taste of what's to come: X number of German troops marched into Austria on (date) after Hitler declared Y. How long the Germans stayed; effects on Austrian population; the extent to which the Nazis had the support of the people; effects on the Jewish and other vulnerable populations. That should be the intro, not the history of the 50 years or so before Anschluss. Anyone who knows nothing about Anschluss still knows nothing about it after reading your intro.
 * As for the dense writing, just looking at the intro - examples: "The prospect of an Anschluss had been the subject of inconclusive debate prior to the Austro-Prussian War of 1866": debate where, between whom, why inconclusive? "Bismarck deliberately excluded Austria because he believed the Austrian elite would be a harmful counter-balance to the Prussian landed aristocracy — the so-called Junkers — in the reunified Germany." What does "harmful counter-balance" mean? Why harmful? Why would this matter to anyone? Why would it matter to Bismarck? In what way was the aristocracy of Austria different from the Prussian aristocracy? It all needs to be unpacked, and the intro is not the place for it. Is all this directly relevant to Hitler's decision to invade?
 * Regarding your footnotes, it's a shame you were forced to use these. Just to repeat my earlier question: is the link given in, say, the second note actually the source of the information in the sentence or paragraph, or just some further reading in relation to that sentence? SlimVirgin (talk) 13:21, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * 2. When you reference "a potted history of distant events" in the intro, I take it you are talking about what was considered but never came to pass in the 19th century? I'd reckon that this part of the intro is the section that's not been overhauled in the extensive editing process which this article has undergone, which is to say that this is fair but hardly beyond repair. Buffyg 16:19, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, I've changed the intro now and shifted the old introduction to the main body of the article. With regards to your examples to "dense writing", well we could ask why? and "give more details" in every single article on wikipedia. So if the argument of "dense writing" only applied to the introduction then I hope you are satisfied now, however if it was a general remark on the article I've to say that would lead us to object to every single FAC. Themanwithoutapast 16:35, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The new intro is much better, thank you. Regarding the writing of the rest, I'm not sure how to explain clearly what I mean by dense; but what, for example, does "harmful counterbalance" mean, and in what way would the Austrian aristocracy have provided it to the Prussians? That sentence is unclear; and what I'm saying is I think there's a way to write intelligently without using words or phrases that won't be understood by people who don't already know the subject. It isn't always possible to do this, but it should be the aim, particularly with an article like this where there are no technical terms. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:40, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, I think there was really a problem with the first section "Situation before the Anschluss" - this consisted of many contributions that have made it into the now comprehensive article from the early beginnings and therefore the whole section was difficult to read. I hope it is better now. Themanwithoutapast 02:05, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Every change that you've made has improved the text and has made it much clearer with a better flow. Thank you. SlimVirgin (talk) 02:20, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * The second footnote clearly refers to this passage: Even before the February meeting, Schuschnigg was under considerable pressure from Germany. This may be seen in the demand to remove the chief of staff of the Austrian Army Alfred Jansa from his office in January 1938. Jansa and his staff had developed a scenario for Austria's defence against a German attack, a situation Hitler wanted to avoid at all costs. Schuschnigg subsequently complied with the demand. and - while a german source - exactly gives this information; in fact I took the information from this article in the Wienerzeitung. It is therefore a valid citation. Themanwithoutapast 16:38, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)\
 * Thanks for the explanation. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:40, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. I hope I'm entitled to vote although I made some edits to the article in the past. I think Themanwithoutapast did excellent work to bring it up to featured article standard. Martg76 22:24, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Thx, at least one person in support. Themanwithoutapast 01:11, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm also supportive, but, then again, I wrote much of the section about the legacy of the Anschluss, which is the section that probably leads to regular remarks about dense style. Perhaps someone should drop Piotr a line on his talk page to remind him to see whether his objections have been addressed. Buffyg 08:51, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, readability has improved alot since my last read through, covers the topic very well. --nixie 14:27, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Reads well now. SlimVirgin (talk) 15:04, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Shaggyjacobs

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Alai 03:51, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:Shaggyjacobs


text:
Talk:Education in Joseon

Rename article
Hi, I'm not 100% certain but I think the title "Education in Joseon" is more concise and matches the current article title for Joseon better. I'll make the move, but please discuss here if disagree. toobigtokale (talk) 01:23, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Education in Joseon


text:
Patrick Kayemba

Patrick Kayemba is a Ugandan politician and diplomat. He is a member of the African Union's Economic, Social and Cultural Council representing East Africa. He is also Chairman of the Rural Economy and Agriculture Committee, one of the ten Sectoral Cluster Committees of the African Union.

title: Patrick Kayemba


text:
Talk:Korean flower arrangement

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Korean flower arrangement. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://londonflowerschool.com/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050416000523/http://kn.koreaherald.co.kr/SITE/data/html_dir/2001/02/10/200102100022.asp to http://kn.koreaherald.co.kr/SITE/data/html_dir/2001/02/10/200102100022.asp

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:54, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Korean flower arrangement


text: Talk:Korean jade carving

title: Talk:Korean jade carving


text:
Shane Stone

Shane Leslie Stone (born 25 September 1950) is an Australian political figure. He served as the Chair of the Council for the Order of Australia from 2018 to 2023. He was also the Coordinator-General of the National Recovery and Resilience Agency and its predecessors until August 2022. He was previously the Chief Minister of the Northern Territory between May 1995 and February 1999, representing the Country Liberal Party. He was also the President of the Liberal Party of Australia between July 1999 and 2005.

1990s
First elected to the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly Electoral division of Port Darwin as a member of the Country Liberal Party (CLP) in 1990, Stone held several portfolios, including Attorney-General, Education and the Arts, Employment and Training, Mines and Energy, Industries and Development, and Asian Relations and Trade. In late 1997 Stone attracted sustained criticism when as the First Law Officer being the Attorney-General he appointed himself a Queen's Counsel.

Stone was the Chief Minister during the referendum for statehood for the Northern Territory in 1998. Electors were asked to vote on whether the Northern Territory should become a state with a constitution that had been approved by a Constitutional Assembly. A bipartisan committee of the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly had recommended a constitution and that it should be further considered by an elected Constitutional Assembly. The CLP Government put forward a different constitution to a non-elected Constitutional Assembly. The referendum failed narrowly. The following year Stone resigned as Chief Minister; 18 months later the CLP under Denis Burke lost the next Territory election after 27 years in power. In 1999 he became the federal President of the Liberal Party of Australia, and was appointed a Commander of the Order of Kinabalu by the Malaysian state of Sabah.

2000s
In 2001 he wrote a memo, later leaked to the press, that suggested that the government of John Howard was seen as "mean and tricky". The ensuing controversy quickly mushroomed, with Stone and Howard both being accused of leaking the memo.

Stone is the Executive Chairman of the APAC Group of Companies. He was the National Chairman of the Duke of Edinburgh's International Award - Australia from 2012 to 2018. He is currently an Award Ambassador. Awarded the Centenary Medal in 2001, Stone was appointed a Companion of the Order of Australia in the 2006 Queen's Birthday Honours for his service to politics, industry, and bi-lateral relations between Australia and the Asia-Pacific region. In 2018, Stone was appointed chair of the Council for the Order of Australia. In 2019 he was presented with the Gold Distinguished Service Medal, The Duke of Edinburgh's International Award – Australia, this being the highest level of recognition made by the Award in Australia. The award was made by Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex.

2020s
In March 2019, he was appointed by Prime Minister Scott Morrison as head of the North Queensland Livestock Industry Recovery Agency following the North Queensland floods. In December 2019, North Queensland Livestock Industry Recovery Agency was expanded to include drought and renamed into a new National Drought and North Queensland Flood Response and Recovery Agency, with Stone appointed the Coordinator-General of the new agency. The agency was further subsumed into the National Recovery and Resilience Agency (NRRA) on 5 May 2021 and Stone continued to be the Coordinator-General of the new agency. During the Queensland and New South Wales floods in March 2022, Stone suggested inundated homes in flood-prone areas should not be rebuilt, and residents of flood-prone areas needed to "face realities". He was criticised by the opposition Labor Party for being "insensitive to those who had lost properties and livelihoods" and should be sacked for "victim blaming".

Following Labor's victory at the May 2022 federal election, in July 2022, the new Albanese government announced the merger of the NRRA and the Emergency Management Australia on 1 September 2022 to form the National Emergency Management, Resilience and Recovery Agency (NEMRRA). Following the announcement, Stone took leave and left the NRRA on 31 August.

title: Shane Stone


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Better Version of God

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete Sjakkalle (Check!)  12:27, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A Better Version of God
Imaginary, or crystal-ball, release. Google=5—Wahoofive (talk) 03:55, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, or maximally merge with Fiona Apple. Also: "finally" is POV. JFW | T@lk  11:36, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge — Chameleon 19:39, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Unverified, the 9 google hits are all irrelevant (mainly discussion board talks on religion). Delete unless somebody manages to substantiate this. - Mike Rosoft 18:05, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.  Please do not edit this page .


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linux Kernel Prediction

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. — Xezbeth 07:34, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Linux Kernel Prediction
This is speculative original research, making it not encyclopedic on two grounds (WP:NOR and WP:NOT). Kelly Martin 03:56, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete —Sean κ. + 04:18, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete — Make sure to salvage relevant material for other articles first... but, definitely original research. gren 04:25, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, on both grounds. --W(t) 05:01, 2005 Jun 8 (UTC)
 * Delete Blackcats 10:02, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Concur with Kelly Martin. Sjakkalle (Check!)  12:42, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * If you must... It is on my site; but I gess I'll just have to publish it some where else :( 66.81.20.130 14:47, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for not taking it personally —Sean κ. +

 * Delete original research. — Chameleon 19:39, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - unmaintainable, too specific for Wikipedia. (And when I see exact dates for future software releases I always laugh a lot.) Pavel Vozenilek 19:45, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.  Please do not edit this page .


text: Talk:Ekiben

title: Talk:Ekiben


text:
User:Chibestia~enwiki

My contributions are mainly for Wikipedia en Español...

leche leche

title: User:Chibestia~enwiki


text: Category:Australian chess players

title: Category:Australian chess players


text:
Talk:Moon landing

Beresheet no longer private entity closest to success
this should be updated to reflect Intuitive’s lander landing and functioning. 71.191.50.222 (talk) 04:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Precise dates in the lede
In the current lede section many precise dates are provided. Because this article isn't principally about the history of moon landings and because these dates are available in the linked supporting articles, shortened dates (i.e. just years) likely increase the article's readability. (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 23:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

dude pakistan just landed on the moon with SUPARCO, i need to update it.
Hellouts (talk) 16:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Liu1126 (talk) 16:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
 * And it hasn't happened anyway. 1) Just launched 2) a cubesat that won't land. Canterbury Tail talk 16:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Please update the map, IM-1 has landed and soon change6 will also
IM-1 landing coordinates: https://geohack.toolforge.org/geohack.php?pagename=IM-1&params=80.13_S_1.44_E_globe:moon LakhnawiNawab (talk) 18:30, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Moon landing


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Vale

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. — Xezbeth 07:34, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Tim Vale
Delete: Non-notable. Possible vanity. Perhaps the author will expand the article to show why this person is notable. Failing that, this should be deleted. --Durin 04:01, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Vanity Daniel Case 04:04, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn --Xcali 04:28, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think this was supposed to be the author's user page. It is now anyway. - DS1953 04:53, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity. JamesBurns 06:35, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn, first person vanity. --Etacar11 16:16, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity. — Chameleon 19:36, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or Userfy

 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.  Please do not edit this page .


text:
Stand Up Speak Up

Stand Up Speak Up was a Europe-wide campaign that was launched in January 2005 by the French football player Thierry Henry following an increase in reports of racist incidents in football across Europe. The campaign started when the former Spanish footballer Luis Aragonés, at this time coach of Spain national team, said these words towards his player and Henry's Arsenal teammate, José Antonio Reyes: "You will show this black shit (Thierry Henry) that you´re better than him". It led to Nike creating the "Stand Up Speak Up" campaign. Together with Nike and other top European players like Rio Ferdinand and Carles Puyol, the protests against this continuing problem inviting football fans to voice their opposition to racism.

The symbol of the campaign is two interlocked wristbands, one black, and one white. About five million of these wristbands have been sold all over Europe. The wrist bands are no longer being sold and there is no intention to reproduce them, but they are still available on the internet. All the funds raised are passed on to a central Stand Up Speak Up fund that will look to support initiatives that aim to combat racism in football through a variety of programmes and initiatives. This successful campaign included footballers such as Wayne Rooney, Ronaldinho, Cristiano Ronaldo and Adriano. Stand Up Speak Up claimed at the end in 2009 more than $6.5 million and spent them to 238 projects.

Controversy sparked when Gary Neville claimed Nike was only involved for commercial gain and not their anti-racism stance. This carried over into a match against Arsenal as Neville and Manchester United team mate Paul Scholes refused to wear the different anti-racism tracksuit top that players from both sides wore.

title: Stand Up Speak Up


text:
Fred Cole (musician)

Frederick Lee Cole (August 28, 1948 – November 9, 2017) was an American rock singer and guitarist who played with several bands from the 1960s until his death, most notably The Lollipop Shoppe, Dead Moon, and Pierced Arrows. He was associated mainly with the garage punk genre though he was also influenced by hard rock, blues, country, and folk music. The majority of his recorded output was self-financed and independently released on his own record label, Tombstone Records.

Early career
In 1964, Cole began his recording career in Las Vegas with his band, the Lords, at the Teenbeat Club, releasing a single titled "Ain't Got No Self-Respect." His next single, from 1965, was a promo-only called "Poverty Shack" b/w "Rover," with a band named Deep Soul Cole.

The Weeds / The Lollipop Shoppe
In 1966 Cole's band The Weeds gained notice in garage rock circles, and their only single, a 1960s punk track called It's Your Time (b/w Little Girl, Teenbeat Club Records), has become a collectors' favorite. The A-side appeared on one of the Nuggets anthologies. The band was promised an opening slot on a Yardbirds bill at the Fillmore in San Francisco, but on their arrival found that the venue hadn't heard of them.

Angry at management and fearing the military draft, the band decided to head up to Canada, but ran out of gas in Portland, Oregon. There, they started playing at a club called the Folk Singer, where Kathleen "Toody" Conner worked. Cole and Toody soon fell in love and were married in 1967, although The Weeds' manager insisted they keep the marriage secret.

Another manager required The Weeds to change their name to The Lollipop Shoppe because he also managed The Seeds and thought the names were too similar, and to fit the current bubblegum trend (although their 1968 LP on UNI Records (a now-defunct subsidiary of MCA), titled Just Colour, is more a mix of garage rock and the psychedelia of bands such as Love). The album and its single "You Must Be a Witch" didn't chart, but remain underground favorites. The band also released another single, "Someone I Knew" b/w "Through My Window," played many shows in San Francisco with performers such as Janis Joplin and The Doors, and had two tracks on the soundtrack LP to the film Angels from Hell.

The Lollipop Shoppe broke up in 1969, but reappeared as The Weeds with another single in 1971.

Whizeagle and Zipper
Frustrated with the music business and still of draft age, Cole headed for Alaska with Toody and their two young children. They got as far as the Yukon, where they homesteaded for a year. Upon their return, Cole tried unsuccessfully to secure another record deal in Los Angeles. He settled in Portland and opened a musical equipment store called Captain Whizeagle's. Taking his musical career into his own hands, he formed the hard rock band Zipper and released an LP in 1975 on his and Toody's label, Whizeagle.

King Bee, The Rats, Western Front
Cole's next band, King Bee, saw him playing guitar for the first time in addition to singing. A last-minute invitation to open for The Ramones introduced them to the punk sounds of the time. They released the "Hot Pistol" single on Whizeagle in 1978, but soon broke up. In an attempt to find a stable lineup, Cole taught Toody to play bass and they formed The Rats. Their self-titled debut was released in 1980 on Whizeagle. Intermittent Signals followed in 1981, and 1983 saw the release of the third LP, In a Desperate Red. After losing three drummers, and tired of the macho direction the punk scene had taken, Cole disbanded The Rats and began an old-time country band called The Western Front. They released only two singles, "Orygun" b/w "Clementine" and "Stampede" b/w "Looking Back at Me" in 1985, but they influenced many local punkers to develop an interest in country-rock and rockabilly.

The Range Rats and Dead Moon
Toody, who had occasionally performed with The Western Front and recorded a single with them, rejoined Cole for another country-influenced project, The Range Rats, in 1986. Drummer Andrew Loomis auditioned for this band, but it didn't work out, so Cole and Toody carried on with a drum machine. In 1987, while returning from Reno (their favorite vacation spot), Cole and Toody decided they wanted to play rock 'n' roll again. They called Andrew Loomis, who was a better fit for this project, and Dead Moon was born.

Dead Moon's music is a blend of dark '60s garage with punk rock; It was described by Robert Christgau as sounding "like the 13th Floor Elevators without the clinical dementia". Their early records, In the Graveyard, Unknown Passage, and Defiance, appeared on the band's own Tombstone Records, named for the music store Cole and Toody operated in Clackamas, Oregon. Cole mastered these records on a mono lathe from the 1950s that had been used for The Kingsmen's version of "Louie Louie". These releases helped them gain cult followings around the United States and in Europe, especially in Germany, home of their European record label Music Maniac.

Pierced Arrows and documentary
After releasing "Dead Ahead" and touring Europe, Dead Moon broke up in 2006, and, with a new drummer, Kelly Halliburton, Fred and Toody formed the band Pierced Arrows.

In 2004 U.S. documentary filmmaking couple (Jason Summers and Kate Fix) produced Unknown Passage: The Dead Moon Story.

Death
Fred Cole died in November 2017 at the age of 69, from liver disease.

title: Fred Cole (musician)


text:
Udayadityavarman II

Udayadityavarman II (ឧទ័យាទិត្យវរ្ម័នទី២) ruled the Angkor Kingdom from 1050 to 1066 A.D. He was the successor of Suryavarman I but not his son; he descended from Yasovarman I's spouse.

He built the Baphuon Temple to honor the god Shiva, but some of the sculptures are dedicated to Buddha. He also completed the construction of the West Baray reservoir and built the West Mebon, a raised-earth island in the center.

The Sdok Kak Thom temple, located near the present day Thai town of Aranyaprathet, was also constructed during his reign. The temple was home to a gray sandstone stele, 1.51 meters high, with a detailed inscription that recounted the sequence of previous Khmer kings. The inscription stele is now part of the collection of the national museum in Bangkok.

During his reign, several attempted rebellions, in 1051 and 1065, were crushed by his general Sangrama.

He was succeeded by his younger brother Harshavarman III.

title: Udayadityavarman II


text:
Whidbey

Whidbey can refer to:
 * Joseph Whidbey - a member of the Royal Navy who served on the Vancouver Expedition
 * Whidbey, the Microsoft pre-release codename for Visual Studio 2005, as a reference to the island in the United States
 * Whidbey Telecom (Formerly Whidbey Telephone Company) a Telecommunications company operating on the south end of Whidbey Island and Point Roberts, Washington
 * USS Whidbey Island (LSD-41), a US Navy dock landing ship

Places
All named after Joseph Whidbey:
 * Point Whidbey, headland in South Australia
 * Whidbey Isles, an island group in South Australia
 * Whidbey Isles Conservation Park, protected area associated with the South Australian island group
 * Whidbey Island, Washington, United States
 * Whidbey Reach, a segment of the Gardner Canal, British Columbia, Canada

title: Whidbey


text:
Wage curve

The wage curve is the negative relationship between the levels of unemployment and wages that arises when these variables are expressed in local terms. According to David Blanchflower and Andrew Oswald (1994, p. 5), the wage curve summarizes the fact that "A worker who is employed in an area of high unemployment earns less than an identical individual who works in a region with low joblessness."

An explanation for the wage curve
One way to understand the wage curve is as follows. The labour supply of each individual is positively correlated to wages, therefore the higher is the hourly wage offered, the more hours an individual is willing to work. However, there is a limit to which every person would be willing to sacrifice an hour of leisure or rest, for an hour's worth of wages. Let's say that X is the maximum number of hours a person can work, and $A is the minimum hourly wage rate he expects in return. Any wage $B, greater than $A, will increase the worker's daily wage without increasing the hours of work. So if you need more hours of work than X, you need to hire more people.

Say you need to purchase Y hours of labour from the labour market. Let us assume that Y = 4X. This means that Y is four times as much as one labourer's maximum labour offer. If you pay $A an hour then you can hire 4 labourers to work for X hours each. However, depending on the labour market conditions, other options are open:

Say that there are not very many jobs in the labour market, unemployment is high and a lot of people are under-employed (working much fewer than X hours). In this situation the going rate is likely to be lower than $A as it is very unlikely that an employee would be asked to work for X hours. You would save money by hiring more than 4 labourers with each of them working fewer than X hours.

Say the labour market is tight and most people are already working X hours a day. It is very hard to find people who are not already earning $A an hour, and because of that you must match the money offer elsewhere in order to get someone to work for you. The wage level in this scenario would be higher than the earlier scenario.

In short, the lower unemployment is and the fewer laborers there are available, the higher the wages. The contrary is true when unemployment is high. This is the essence of the wage curve.

Implications of wage curve
It is utilised to explain why within a country, some regions suffer worse unemployment than others. Labourers could, but, for whatever reasons, are unwilling to migrate from regions with high unemployment, low wage areas to low unemployment, high wage areas.

One of the reasons why unemployed labourers would not want to migrate to other areas with plenty of jobs is because of home-ownership. The worker might be deterred from moving because of the costs involved in selling off their home and moving. Blanchflower and Oswald have found that the unemployment rate is positively correlated to home-ownership rate in a cross country study.

However recently some micro econometric evidence suggests that the relationship between home-ownership and unemployment is slightly more complicated. People who are employed are more likely to be able to afford a mortgage, and are therefore more likely to have bought their own home. The evidence indicates that the employed home-owners are less likely to become unemployed, and they are also more likely to be employed in jobs with high stability and therefore less likely to change jobs. The unemployed home-owners are more likely to find jobs within the local areas, and less likely to find jobs which would necessitate a move. The overall picture suggests that although home-owners are reluctant to move around, they are more often than not employed, and therefore not contributing to the unemployment rate.

title: Wage curve