Talk:Supply

Units on supply?

What are the units on Q in the supply curve? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.122.167.162 (talk) 04:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

downward-sloping supply

I removed a section from Supply and demand on downward sloping supply (diff). It reads as WP:OR, but should still possibly be deatlh wtih more carefully. If so, it belongs here rather than in that article. Quite possibly the same is true for that article's section on a vertical supply curve. CRETOG8(t/c) 04:37, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete sentence

" The mathematical relationship is MR = MC = w/MP_L where w is the wage rate and MP_L. " 128.193.8.12 (talk) 14:09, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction

What are these two sentences for? "In economics the term supply has a special meaning. It can be defined in the following." — Preceding unsigned comment added by T-man 2396 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to make Supply (economics) the primary page

@Lithopsian: just reverted my edits moving Supply (economics) here. He seems to have objected to the fact that I did a cut-and-paste move, rather than formally renaming the Supply (economics) article, but the only reason I did that was because when I first tried to rename this article to Supply (disambiguation) it wouldn't let me- since that article is currently a redirect back to Supply. I figured the cut-and-paste option was the simplest way to get around that.

But in any case, what I would like to propose is just that we reinstate the changes I made, regardless of how technically it is best to do that. Someone who wants to search for "Supply" on Wikipedia very likely wants to read about the economic concept, because although the word is often used in other ways, those other uses would merit a Wiktionary entry and not an actual Wikipedia article. We can just use a hatnote to direct people to the disambiguation page.

Another merit of my proposal is that it would be consistent with what we are currently doing for the Demand article. It's not Demand (economics)- simply Demand, even though that word is often used in other ways. Montgolfière (talk) 16:18, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think WP:OTHER (i.e. '"supply" shouldn't use parenthetical disambiguation if "demand" doesn't') is a compelling rationale for using Supply (economics) as the primary topic of "Supply", given all the other topics that use this term. But the consensus may go the other way, so feel free to initiate a move request. Ibadibam (talk) 18:07, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just a suggestion, but if you are having a discussion about renaming this article (and several others), it might make sense to have it at requested moves both for a wider audience and so that the moves can actually be done afterwards. Lithopsian (talk) 18:54, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]