Talk:Julius Shiskin
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Julius Shiskin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A fact from Julius Shiskin appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 July 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Did you know nomination
[edit]- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:49, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
- ... that the recipe for a recession, as defined by the renowned economist Julius Shiskin (pictured), is simply "two consecutive quarters of GDP decline"? Source: https://www.nytimes.com/1974/12/01/archives/the-changing-business-cycle-points-op-view.html
- ALT1: ... that the definition of a recession as "two consecutive quarters of GDP decline" is attributed to Julius Shiskin (pictured)? Source: https://www.nytimes.com/1974/12/01/archives/the-changing-business-cycle-points-op-view.html
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/WTIC-TV
Created by RAJIVVASUDEV (talk). Self-nominated at 07:06, 2 July 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Julius Shiskin; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall: @RAJIVVASUDEV: Good article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:21, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
- @RAJIVVASUDEV and Onegreatjoke: this is accepted as a helpful heuristic, but I don't think scholars consider it the definition in every case – could a hook be drafted that reflects that? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:31, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- ALT2:... that Julius Shiskin (pictured), presented a comprehensive set of guidelines for identifying recessions, which notably included the criterion of two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth? Source: https://www.nytimes.com/1974/12/01/archives/the-changing-business-cycle-points-op-view.html
- @Theleekycauldron: Kindly check. Thanks RV (talk) 08:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- That hook is alright. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- @RAJIVVASUDEV and Onegreatjoke: pardon me, but I don't think it is – if only because "comprehensive" and "notably" are editorial statements. Perhaps something like:
- ALT3: ... that Julius Shiskin (pictured) originated the idea that a recession can be identified by two quarters of negative GDP growth?
- Let me know, thanks :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:03, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- I am okay with that also. Thanks RV (talk) 02:04, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
- That hook is alright. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:06, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Economic downturn relevance?
[edit]The following line seems irrelevant to his biography: "While he was in this post, the United States experienced the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression." I am not sure what the Commissioner of Labor Statistics has to do with this fact, except that he would have been in charge of collecting and disseminating statistics about labor during an economic downturn. WittgensteinsKey (talk) 18:41, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- At least it's no longer in the "Legacy" section. I was assuming it was relevant to his having suggested criteria for defining a recession, but I don't think there is a source cited actually saying this. If no source explicitly making the connection can be found, perhaps it should be removed? Brunton (talk) 19:03, 23 July 2023 (UTC)