Talk:Jevons paradox/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Malleus Fatuorum 14:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC) I'll add my thoughts section by section below.

Lead

• "Environmental economists have also pointed out that fuel use will unambiguously decline if increased efficiency is coupled with a green tax ...". Is "unambiguously" the right word here? What's the ambiguity?

Energy conservation policy

• "Third, environmental economists have pointed out that fuel use will unambiguously decrease ...". Same point as above.

• "... interventions that impose conservation standards that simultaneously increase costs do not display the Jevons paradox." It's not the interventions that display the paradox, they cause it to occur.

Notes

• All author names should be consistently given in last name, first name order.

Images

Jevons.jpeg As the author is unknown, then the PD licence claim that (s)he died more than 70 years ago doesn't apply. Is there any evidence of a publication date?

---

It's disappointing to see that these suggestions for improvement have been ignored by the nominator, but I've fixed those that I think made this article fall slightly short of the GA criteria, and I'm now listing it as a GA.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.