Talk:Greek economic miracle

Merging the articles

Both articles (Greek economic miracle and Greek miracle) talk about the same "miracle" and are quite distinctive at the moment. The prefered name should be the longer and clearer name. This merger needs an economist's touch (which I am not). Good luck, DGtal 08:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would defintiely agree with a merger - followed by a copyedit. In fact, far from being distinctive, the two articles are more or less identical.TobyJ 15:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem do be right, tough one seems to be a year more updated that the other (i am referring to the stats in the last paragraph). DGtal 10:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, folks, I had uploaded the article with two different titles (and then didn't know how to merge them). I have simply asked for deletion of the "Greek miracle" article, since the "economic miracle" is the one I have been updating, while its title is (indeed) more accurate. Skartsis 21:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If "Greek miracle" is a term which is also used in the literature, I suggest you create a redirect page (see Wikipedia:Redirect). Good luck, DGtal 22:58, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rephrase re junta

I suggest that the sentence "A major setback came with the collapse of the military junta in 1974 when the country recorded its worst annual contraction in GDP" should be rephrased. You will find few people in the Hellenic Republic who would see the junta's fall as a "setback". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.215.127 (talk) 13:39, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Nurg (talk) 22:11, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Updating for 2011

"This performance made Greece an advanced economy, and Greeks today enjoy an income per capita which is close to that of their French or German EU partners.[4]"

ahem* —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.33.126.26 (talk) 15:43, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know, with the current events data for Greece are worse, so I modified the end of my article (which focuses on past events, anyway). Skartsis (talk) 14:57, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

These edits

The text was all synthesis, the sources were not discussing a «Greek economic miracle», why are sockpuppets in New Jersey putting it back? Spumuq (talq) 09:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus for redirecting this page Economic history of Greece and the Greek world. If you believe that there is content that is not supported by the sources and sources cannot be found, that content can be removed from the article. If you believe the subject is not notable you can take it to afd. --Tdl1060 (talk) 20:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

None of your references say a «Greek economic miracle» existed, they do not mention it at all. There is no consensus for you to break wikipedia policy, I removed that content, and you reverted it again.Spumuq (talq) 13:36, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"The Greek Paradox: Promise Vs. Performance", which is the second reference cited in the article certainly does mention the "Greek economic miracle" by name. I suggest you check the references before making such conclusions.--Tdl1060 (talk) 19:09, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Spumuq: None of your references say a «Greek economic miracle» existed, they do not mention it at all. Yes they do. As Tdl1060 told you reference [2] mentions "Greek economic miracle" directly: "phase of 1960 to 1973 (the period hailed by many as the "Greek economic miracle")" I also think you have no idea how to do Google searches. It didn't take me long to find sixteen (16) new references all of which study the Greek economic miracle. Having no idea of how to Google search is not necessarily bad. But blanking articles and insulting other editors about it because you cannot find references or read their contents, although plenty of references exist, and also having an anti-Greek POV is extremely disruptive and approaches vandalism. I suggest you modify your attitude drastically and as soon as you can. And since you are here to write an encyclopedia, at least that's what I assume, why don't you expand this article using the 16 new references I found? That would go a long way toward making you a better editor. What do you think? Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 21:06, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Contradictory Statements from Different Wikipedia Articles

The Greek and Spanish miracle Wikipedia articles, and other articles that state the miracles, both mention between the time of the 1950s-1970s as being the second fastest growing economy behind Japan. They both can not be second place? Should one be corrected? Different sources coming to different conclusions? Weigh one source over the other? Add a disclaimer, or note, over disputed sources? I don't know what to do

Greek Economic Miracle Article: "[time frame of 1950-73]...the Greek economy grew... second in the world only to Japan"

Economy of Greece Article: "[implied time frame post-WW2]...Greece saw growth rates second only to those of Japan, while ranking first in Europe in terms of GDP growth"

Spanish Economic Miracle Article: "[between 1959-1974 stated in the beginning of the article] second highest growth rate in the world, only slightly behind Japan"

Francisco Franco Article: "Spain became the second-fastest growing economy in the world between 1959 and 1973, just behind Japan"

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 21Helios12 (talk • contribs) 02:05, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

OTE Telecom tower.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:58, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Pyrgos-3.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:06, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]