User talk:Stevencgold

Welcome

Hello, Stevencgold, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Banjeboi 22:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello. I'm one of the contributors at the deletion discussion of your article. I know it is hard to have your first real interaction with the community be one that seems negative, but hopefully things will turn out for the best. The article, Teaching and Learning Economics with Simulation Games represented a type of work that the wikipedia community has generally decided to avoid. We have a policy that lays out the community consensus about what sort of articles may not be suitable for wikipedia, it is available at WP:NOT. How-to pages are generally not used on wikipedia as we try to stick to a summary of encyclopedic facts on subjects of note. However, I don't think this article is beyond redemption. On the contrary, I feel that an article covering the research into the subject of both "games" (in the game theory sense) and "games" (in the ludic sense) in the classroom would be welcome on wikipedia. You may notice that I shortened the article considerably. This was not an indication that the article deserves to be that length, just that it should be started from solid foundations. Plenty of opportunity exists to expand the article by summarizing work in the discipline and its impact in secondary and post-secondary education. Thanks for bringing this article to wikipedia, and welcome. Protonk (talk) 03:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Basically I agree with Protonk here. Next time you want to build an article you might want to start it in your userspace and ask for some other editors to give you feedback before launching it into the mainspace. Many articles are much worse that the one you created but that is beside the point as someone thinks this one should go. Let's improve it! Banjeboi 22:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Short thoughts on the subject

I would strongly consider merging this new article and your other article into Economics education. I think that both the subject of monopolistic competition and the use of simulations in economics education could improve that article. You may even want to (As an alternate option) merge this new article into Simulations and games in economics education and summarize that new article in the Economics education article.

Remember that the articles should look more like general overviews and less like a how-to guide. Sections like Short-run Example Simulation: Monopolistic Competition and the long-run counterpart look like a fairly explicit run-down of a scenario. That may not be within the scope of the encyclopedia.

Take a look at the guideline on external links. The AEA website linked from the lead of the article should actually be in a separate section at the bottom of the page.

The basic format of a wikipedia article requires a lead (described in the link above), which is a front-loaded summary of the contents of the article (an executive summary, if you will), but not a concluding section. The lead should summarize every major point in the article and should usually (though not always) follow the format of the article.

the article itself should have some content important to an encyclopedia. Who started using games involving monopolists/oligopolists in economics education? How widespread are their use? are there prominent critics of the method?

These comments aren't meant to say that the article isn't a good start or that you need to do all of this. Just that they may be directions you might want to go in.

I'll try to come up with some more comments later. Protonk (talk) 23:49, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

THANKS SO MUCH. I appreciate your comments and look forward to some more!! Stevencgold (talk) 13:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]