Talk:Economic graph
Untitled
[edit]I suggest that a {{for}} template be added to the top of this article linking to the "Economic Graph" section of the LinkedIn article. The wording could be along the lines of "For the LinkedIn initiative, see LinkedIn#Economic_graph." I'm making the suggestion here without editing the page myself as I am not NPOV on LinkedIn. I work for an agency that supports LinkedIn's communications team. I would be very grateful if someone else would be willing to consider this edit and whether they agree that it adds to the page's value, and then make the update on my behalf. Mary Gaulke (talk) 02:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. - Mary Gaulke (talk) 15:00, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- I am very uncomfortable supporting this. On the one hand, I am fascinated by the concept, and look forward to seeing it unfold. However, the links I glanced at seem to be talking about something in the future, and Wikipedia takes a dim view regarding predicted objects. I took a quick glance at LinkedIn, see some things called Economic graphs, but I was unable to get a good sense of what I was looking at. I think I'd like to see more coverage of the concept, including a better explanation of what it is (what I saw so far bore no resemblance to an economic Graph. They may have, like Google invented a term bearing little resemblance to the words used, which is not an argument against a for link) , but I'd like to see more evidence that this is a common term. I am explicitly not identifying this as a request not fulfilled, on the chance that someone else will reach a different conclusion. At the moment, it looks more like a marketing attempt to create some buzz for a new term, than a legitimate need to serve readers who may be searching for the Linked In term.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your thoughtful response to my request, and for outlining your concerns in such detail. I understand that this decision is in the community's hands, but I hope I can help by offering a little more information and context in response to what you've said:
- I am very uncomfortable supporting this. On the one hand, I am fascinated by the concept, and look forward to seeing it unfold. However, the links I glanced at seem to be talking about something in the future, and Wikipedia takes a dim view regarding predicted objects. I took a quick glance at LinkedIn, see some things called Economic graphs, but I was unable to get a good sense of what I was looking at. I think I'd like to see more coverage of the concept, including a better explanation of what it is (what I saw so far bore no resemblance to an economic Graph. They may have, like Google invented a term bearing little resemblance to the words used, which is not an argument against a for link) , but I'd like to see more evidence that this is a common term. I am explicitly not identifying this as a request not fulfilled, on the chance that someone else will reach a different conclusion. At the moment, it looks more like a marketing attempt to create some buzz for a new term, than a legitimate need to serve readers who may be searching for the Linked In term.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
- I understand the concerns related to WP:CRYSTALBALL and content on Wikipedia that is merely predictive. I've discussed this issue previously in the Talk page for the LinkedIn article, but I'm happy to revisit it if that would be helpful.
- Currently the Economic Graph is not a standalone product available at a single destination within LinkedIn; rather it may be more accurate to say it is being built upon the current architecture of LinkedIn with an eye towards presenting it in a number of ways in the future. Today the Search experience has been overhauled with this thinking and functionality in mind. As you saw in the LinkedIn article, company executives are positioning the initiative prominently among their future plans and current priorities. The project also has a dedicated page on the site.
- In my view, the phrase "economic graph" is becoming increasingly more common in a LinkedIn context. For instance, the majority of the results on the first page of a Google search for the term pertain to LinkedIn. I know Google results vary from person to person based on Google's personalization features, but looking it up just now in a separate browser with no stored data, I saw that only one of the first five results - this Wikipedia article - was not related to LinkedIn. In my eyes this is an indicator that the term's association with LinkedIn is growing, but I'd be happy to hear further suggestions on how to assess that.
- Thanks again for your response - detailed feedback like what you've provided is really helpful in giving me a better understanding of all of the considerations that go into making Wikipedia better. Mary Gaulke (talk) 16:31, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
- Procrastination (by me) helped. At the original time of the request, I had reservations, as expressed above. Since that time, the section in the Linked In article has been expanded, which eliminates my concerns.--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:16, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- Nifty - thank you again. Mary Gaulke (talk) 12:55, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- Procrastination (by me) helped. At the original time of the request, I had reservations, as expressed above. Since that time, the section in the Linked In article has been expanded, which eliminates my concerns.--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:16, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks again for your response - detailed feedback like what you've provided is really helpful in giving me a better understanding of all of the considerations that go into making Wikipedia better. Mary Gaulke (talk) 16:31, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Economics
[edit]Note on graph 41.190.30.132 (talk) 21:27, 17 October 2022 (UTC)