Talk:Economic sociology

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Sociology Start‑class High‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Economics Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

Splitting section: Economic sociology of US immigration

It seems like a no-brainer to me that the section Economic sociology of US immigration should be split off, either into its own page or added to Immigration to the United States or another similar page. CircleAdrian (talk) 09:39, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Expert input

Someone with more time than me needs to provide detail about this field. The biggest concepts of contemporary economic sociology such as brokerage, strength of weak ties, structural holes, influentials, isomorphism, etc., are not defined anywhere on wikipedia. They all deserve their own pages with sections describing them here. There are excellent summary articles on the field out there--someone just needs to sit down to translate them here (I will try to do this in the summer, if no one beats me to it first.)DarwinPeacock (talk) 23:13, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The modern capitalisation of the interpersonal relations

I have posted a suggestion here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Sociology#The_modern_capitalisation_of_the_interpersonal_relations which could be of relevance for the Economic sociology section... 87.51.147.41 (talk) 08:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Self-promotion and undisclosed COI editing

Content should be based on independent reliable sources, phrased in neutral language, and should not be added by single-purpose editors who are probably closely connected to the organization in question. In recent months there have been multiple attempts to spam as many mentions and self-published articles of the ES/PE as possible. If this is a relevant academic association, it should be possible to provide independent sources to show this relevance. And it shouldn't be necessary to spam to increase the association's online presence in direct violation of WP:PROMO, WP:SPAM and WP:COI. GermanJoe (talk) 13:41, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"conceptual endeavor to contextualize economic actions, processes and structures in the wider societal context". Of course the definition could probably be expanded a bit. But encyclopedic definitions should define topics in a precise, uninvolved and succinct manner, and not obfuscate simple facts with hollow insubstantial buzzwords. Reverted this part, together with recurring self-promotion in this article. GermanJoe (talk) 12:14, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: There have been some additional messages relevant to this discussion at User talk:77.139.7.109. I have asked the IP user to continue the discussion here on this article talkpage, and to provide independent sources for their claims of significance. GermanJoe (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]