Talk:Demand destruction

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Seems like this is not worth an article as it stands. I suggest merging the one or two paragraphs back into peak oil.Aaron Lawrence 06:56, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just went through and tried to fix some of the article's bigger structural problems (I think the people mentioned are proponents of the theory, not of the crisis, for example), just so I could try to figure out what it's trying to say, and in the end I have to concur with the above. The payload of the article really seems to be in the last sentence.

What comes before is still kind of odd -- paragraph 2 basically says "if we can't make more oil, less people using oil means that some people will still be able to use oil. The fact that most people don't use a lot of oil is a result of most people not using oil, because fewer people are using oil, which doesn't make more oil." --NapoliRoma 18:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2008-07-01: It was seriously in need of re-writing. I believe my edits at least make it accurate. It still needs some more references and examples. --JSD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.137.118 (talk) 16:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article had no structure to it, so i broke it up into sections and cleaned up some writing. I also added some references in the example section, but it could use a better description. Placed a refimprove tag on it.CouchSurfer222 (talk) 06:33, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Demand destruction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100124230835/http://www.scdigest.com:80/assets/Experts/Lean_10-01-13.php to http://www.scdigest.com/assets/Experts/Lean_10-01-13.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:37, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]