Talk:Urban ecology: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'f course, anything thought irrelevant to this place, can just fly away to the english wikipedia (where people will either ignore it, or tear it into pieces :-)) | 'f course, anything thought irrelevant to this place, can just fly away to the english wikipedia (where people will either ignore it, or tear it into pieces :-)) | ||
:I think if the term is 'out there" and being used by others, it should be in the [[w:urban ecology]] article place, if only so that you can see who else is interested enough ithe concept to edit it, and who then to attract over here. | |||
:Usually the most interesting articles are attacked heavily. See [[w:wealth]] and [[w:political economy]]. I put three interesting cut-outs in [[political economy]] here, and perhaps we need [[wealth]] and [[power]] stated here too alon with the other key concepts: | |||
*[[safe]], [[done]] | |||
*[[fair]], [[evil]] | |||
*[[ignore]], [[forgive]] | |||
*[[faction]], [[amoral purchasing]] | |||
I think you get all that right, you probably can make [[Consumerium]] work. |
Revision as of 09:08, 28 April 2003
'f course, anything thought irrelevant to this place, can just fly away to the english wikipedia (where people will either ignore it, or tear it into pieces :-))
- I think if the term is 'out there" and being used by others, it should be in the w:urban ecology article place, if only so that you can see who else is interested enough ithe concept to edit it, and who then to attract over here.
- Usually the most interesting articles are attacked heavily. See w:wealth and w:political economy. I put three interesting cut-outs in political economy here, and perhaps we need wealth and power stated here too alon with the other key concepts:
I think you get all that right, you probably can make Consumerium work.