Talk:Human Action

Books Start‑class

	Books portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Economics Start‑class

	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.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:WPLibertarianism

Why "Disputed POV" category?

What is the dispute over non-neutral POV? (i.e. {{npov|date=August 2011}} )
Would the user(s) that submitted the npov categorization please provide an explanation here. I would like to clean up the article so it could be considered neutral.
J_Tom_Moon_79 (talk) 23:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The language of the opening salvo was highly non-neutral POV although I am uncertain after another quick read of how to correct it. I made a tiny change that had bothered me about the balance but other than that I have not made any additions. I may want to read the piece by von Mises again, but I am not even sure if the content of his work is the issue here... It is simply its portrayal in the summary format suggests aspects of his work in general that are not appropriately characterized... I will be back with more at a later time, but I do not have time at the moment to work on this... Stevenmitchell (talk) 03:17, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Comments on the book" section started by me

Somehow I was logged off while submitting. I plan to expand this page further. For a book claimed to the intellectual counterpart of Das Kapital, its page is too small. N6n (talk) 12:07, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rose Wilder Lane's comment is here: http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/against-the-stream/ Rothbard's here: http://mises.org/article.aspx?title=Human+Action Are these better references? N6n (talk) 13:40, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Failure monopoly to here?

At Talk:Natural_monopoly#Merge_Failure_monopoly_to_here? there is a suggestion to redirect/merge Failure monopoly to here. Any thoughts? ie, is "failure monopoly" worth mentioning in this article? (It is mentioned in Human Action.) A "failure monopoly" seems to be a monopoly where there is no hope of positive return. Thanks, ErikHaugen (talk) 19:20, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given User:Rd232's comment at Talk:Natural_monopoly, I agree that Failure_monopoly would be better to redirect here than there? However, I do not see it worth explaining here if it is not worth explaining elsewhere, as it is reduced to nothing more than a unique phrase used in one section of the book. At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Failure monopoly, I was on the verge of conceding "delete" when it was closed. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]