Hello, Colin.champion, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Keynesian economics. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Jonpatterns (talk) 14:34, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Colin.champion. You appear to have some expertise in economics and have been working on articles in that field. Thanks for that!

Please do have a look at WP:EXPERT, which provides some orientation to experts who want to improve Wikipedia content. Working is here is probably nothing like any writing you have ever done before, and I hope you will be open to taking the time to understand how Wikipedia works and what our mission is.

I have written an as-brief-as-I-can-make-it orientation to Wikipedia, which is at User:Jytdog/How. It explains the mission (which is kind of crazy) and the policies and guidelines the editing community has put in place, that has allowed us to realize the mission over the past 16 years or so. It takes time to learn and much of it might seem bizarre at first, but if you take the time to understand everything, you will see that it is all very coherent.

Happy to discuss general things here, or specific things at any article talk page. Yuo can reply just below, if you would like to discuss. Best regards. Jytdog (talk) 21:35, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wage unit, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

jcc (tea and biscuits) 17:43, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. Do you still think that the article needs? If so, could you point out specific concerns? Thanks. -The Gnome (talk) 12:19, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think you missed out a word... the article still needs what? Are you asking me or Lawrence? Colin.champion (talk) 12:34, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Apologies. I meant to ask you if you still believe the article needs significant improvement and, if so, exactly where. Thanks. -The Gnome (talk) 13:05, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@The Gnome: There are parts of the article that I’m dissatisfied with. Most of all with the section ‘Active fiscal policy’ which lacks any useful references and is not very well organised. The lack of references makes it hard to even get started on improving it, but it’s an important aspect of the subject. Keynesianism has many of the characteristics of a political movement: see Alan Blinder’s equally underreferenced six points. The introductory paras to the article need to outline some salient features of Keynes’s theory and show how they have influenced subsequent policy views, so they in turn depend on the treatment of fiscal policy. The ‘historical context’ is really a summary of how Keynes’s views differ from those of his predecessors, which is covered elsewhere. I think it would be reasonable to delete this section if one could put something satisfactory in its place. But many people visiting the page don’t want to be plunged into dense theory, so there does need to be a fair amount of discursive introduction. All this is just my own view, with the usual caveats of fallibility etc. Colin.champion (talk) 13:55, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I happen to believe that Keynes is more misunderstood than any economist in history! (This is not the same as saying "Keynes was right". Someone might have been 100 percent wrong and still be misunderstood.) I take in your points and place the article in my to-do list. But, of course, there are myriads of other Wikipedians, too, who could help. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 15:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@The Gnome: Okay, cheers, I’ll be glad if you are do some of this. Colin.champion (talk)

Mr Keynes and the Classics, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:46, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

		The Business and Economics Barnstar
		I hereby award this barnstar to editor Colin Champion for outstanding work improving our economics coverage. FeydHuxtable (talk) 10:15, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Keyne's GT in particular needs massive energy to expand with the clarity and accuracy the topic warrants. I was thinking of doing a similar expansion about 10 years ago but then gave up as even planning the expansion was too much hard work. Thanks again for taking it on. FeydHuxtable (talk) 10:15, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Keynesian economics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arthur Marshall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Keynesian economics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Consumption (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:28, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Colin.champion. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Colin.champion. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, and thanks for your work on this article! In response to your email...

I've fixed the bolding problem I could find which may have been caused by conversion to straight quotes, though this may have happened because the marks were previously out of balance. If you see someone changing straight quotes to curly, you can revert that change and point to MOS:STRAIGHT, which expresses a clear preference.

With regard to the span anchors, MOS:HEAD talks about using them if there are a lot of links to a given section. Most articles don't use them, just to keep things simple. I only see two section links internal to this article, which could be easily fixed.

I've added the comment you requested at Talk:Keynes's theory of wages and prices#POV check. -- Beland (talk) 18:44, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for creating that image illustrating the relationship between negative income tax and basic income (File:Cjcbi.svg). I wish I had thrown something like that together a long time ago; it will be very helpful in explaining basic income to people in the future. —Pfhorrest (talk) 18:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pfhorrest: Thanks. I was surprised not to see diagrams elsewhere, but Wikipedia makes it easier than most media. Colin.champion (talk) 10:45, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you are an editor of the page universal basic income. I was wondering if you wanted to join or help Wikipedia:WikiProject Basic Income? The project is currently inactive so it could really use some participation by new members to kick-start it again.

I have also opened a move request on its talk page here - Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Basic Income#Requested move 22 October 2020 - to request that it be re-named to Wikipedia:WikiProject Universal Basic Income. If you could please spare a minute to leave a respond to this request on the talk page there it would also be much appreciated.

I look forward to hearing from you. Helper201 (talk) 15:50, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Colin,

you are a champion indeed! You helped me a lot, and I am very impressed. Thank you :-) 85.193.228.103 (talk) 11:30, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You’re welcome (and overgenerous). Colin.champion (talk) 11:33, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"overgenerous"? Maybe, but I practice my language skills, and you did more than I expected, hence my appreciation. 85.193.228.103 (talk) 16:36, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You said: However the page has received a lot of changes since I left it and I haven’t been receiving notifications so I haven’t kept an eye on them. I don’t know why this happens (me not receiving notifications) – The email alerts only send you ONE the FIRST TIME the article is changed from when you last visited it, while logged in. After that, for every additional change, you don't get an email. From my email alerts: "There will be no other notifications in case of further activity unless you visit this page while logged in." Hopefully that helps. Take care! ---Avatar317^(talk) 23:45, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Avatar317: – I think the rule is that I stay on the watcher list so long as I click on every update. I try to do so, but it’s not a very forgiving system – one slip and you’re doomed. I’ll have to try harder. Or maybe I don’t fully understand how it works. But thanks for trying to help. Colin.champion (talk) 07:49, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your edit here and just wanted to let you know that to my knowledge, there is a Wikipedia standard MOS:QUOTEMARKS ... so if your edit gets changed back by a BOT don't be surprised or angered...Just thought I'd let you know. ---Avatar317^(talk) 23:45, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Avatar317: Thanks for the warning. I know there’s a process around changing straight to curly quotes. I don’t think it’s automated and it sometimes introduces errors. I’ve seen text mangled by over-enthusiastic gnomes, and when no positive error is introduced the formatting is often spoilt – mathematical formulae get spaced incorrectly, and the distinction between quotation marks and mathematical prime symbols gets lost. I think the gnomes should stop interfering with editors’ conscious choices; but I myself should chill out a bit too. There was a discussion of curly quotes here. Colin.champion (talk) 07:58, 28 September 2021 (UTC) [I should mention that the problem with spacing arises from the fact that gnomes who replace curly quotes also replace thin spaces, without which visually correct spacing (as judged by my pair of eyes) cannot be achieved. Colin.champion (talk) 09:26, 28 September 2021 (UTC)][reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I spent the better part of 2.5 days, and you just undid all of them without discussing any of the changes. I fixed spelling errors. I ran things through Grammarly. I discussed significant changes. You don't get to undo everything all at once without talking about them. You can't just make a blanket change to undo all of it. Myclob (talk) 16:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your willingness to stick with a bad-tempered discussion: The other party doubtless feels that you are unreasonable and ill-tempered. I hope you stick with it, continue to assume good faith, ignore the tone and focus on the content. If you do, I believe the two of you can improve the article more than either of you alone, as suggested by the research cited in the section on "Reliability of Wikipedia#Articles on contentious issues" in the Wikipedia article on "Reliability of Wikipedia". For a longer discussion of my perspective on conflict, see Wikiversity:Confirmation bias and conflict. I've been in the military: I've been yelled at ;-) DavidMCEddy (talk) 14:40, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia article on eating crow says it "means humiliation by admitting having been proven wrong after taking a strong position." I sometimes use it to means humiliation by apologizing for having offended someone, even when I don't think I've been "proven wrong". I hesitate long before doing it with an attorney, too many (especially disbarred attorneys) will try to use anything against me. With mere mortals, I usually feel better after having eaten crow, because I've made an effort to improve relations. Often the other party or parties respond positively, and collaboration seems easier.

Ya catch mo' flies with honey than vinega ;-) DavidMCEddy (talk) 13:05, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Colin,

I had a question for you. On the page of Borda Count, you added on 20/01/2021 a table with many voting methods and features/characteristics. I am currently looking forward to work on this topic and I would like to know the sources of this table, as it makes several assumptions on voting methods and their characteristics. Could you please tell me where you got it?

Best regards,

Cedric Cedric Buron (talk) 14:44, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cedric – the table is probably originally due to Markus Schulze. It was drawn up for his article on Schulze method and made transcludable by being implemented as a template: Comparison_of_Schulze_to_preferential_voting_systems. The talk page includes some discussion. Colin.champion (talk) 14:50, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Colin,

Thank you so much for your answer. I've contacted Markus Schulze.

BR. Cedric Buron (talk) 08:35, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ianbu (talk) 04:59, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ianbu: I don’t see the error. Colin.champion (talk) 09:55, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

prefer C to D =>prefer C to B

prefer C to B =>prefer C to D

red voters no prefer on D

blue voters no prefer on B Ianbu (talk) 01:16, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ianbu: No, I think it’s correct as it is. A voter on the left or at the centre prefers a candidate at the centre to a candidate at the right, and a voter on the right or at the centre prefers a candidate at the centre to a candidate on the left. Colin.champion (talk) 08:47, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]