David Tornheim (talk | contribs) →Environmental justice and coal mining in Appalachia: revise !vote to keep base on the WP:RS |
|||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Law|list of Law-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Shawn in Montreal|Shawn in Montreal]] ([[User talk:Shawn in Montreal|talk]]) 15:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)</small> |
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Law|list of Law-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Shawn in Montreal|Shawn in Montreal]] ([[User talk:Shawn in Montreal|talk]]) 15:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)</small> |
||
* '''Userfy''' Ask students to carefully read the [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/Editing_Wikipedia_brochure_%28Wiki_Education_Foundation%29_%282016%29.pdf guide] that comes with these courses and additionally [[WP:RS]], [[WP:OR]] and [[WP:NPOV]]. It might be wise to work on these articles in a sandbox and bring these articles to [[WP:AfC]] for review before attempting publish in main space. --[[User:David Tornheim|David Tornheim]] ([[User talk:David Tornheim|talk]]) 04:10, 15 April 2017 (UTC) |
|||
* <u>'''Keep''', but remove [[WP:OR]] and [[WP:PRIMARY]] sources. This obscure sounding topic is clearly [[WP|GNG|notable based]] on plenty [[WP:SECONDARY]] sources such as [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Yvonne_Braun3/publication/254093122_Coal_Identity_and_the_Gendering_of_Environmental_Justice_Activism_in_Central_Appalachia/links/56c6a7df08ae8cf828ff3f1e.pdf], [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.129.7474&rep=rep1&type=pdf], [http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=jhdrp&sei-redir=1&referer=https%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fscholar%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Denvironmental%2Bjustice%2Bin%2Bappalchia%26btnG%3D%26as_sdt%3D1%252C5%26as_sdtp%3D#search=%22environmental%20justice%20appalchia%22] and much more found in the article. Perhaps the title might be slightly simplified by widening the scope to "Env. Justice in Appalachia" or "Health Impacts in Appalachia" or "Disparity in Appalachia", etc., as a subheading of the wider scoped article. However, the topic is notable, so a full article is justified IMHO.</u> <s>'''Userfy'''</s> Ask students to carefully read the [https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/Editing_Wikipedia_brochure_%28Wiki_Education_Foundation%29_%282016%29.pdf guide] that comes with these courses and additionally [[WP:RS]], [[WP:OR]] and [[WP:NPOV]]. <s>It might be wise to work on these articles in a sandbox and bring these articles to [[WP:AfC]] for review before attempting publish in main space.</s> --[[User:David Tornheim|David Tornheim]] ([[User talk:David Tornheim|talk]]) 04:10, 15 April 2017 (UTC) [revised 20:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)] |
|||
* '''Delete''' – I am the editor who initiated the PROD and I suggested that [[Appalachia#Coal mining]] was the appropriate article in which to add environmental concerns. This article, with its "Environmental justice" title is simply an effort to push the environmental justice social/political movement. – [[User:Srich32977|S. Rich]] ([[User talk:Srich32977|talk]]) 04:01, 15 April 2017 (UTC) |
* '''Delete''' – I am the editor who initiated the PROD and I suggested that [[Appalachia#Coal mining]] was the appropriate article in which to add environmental concerns. This article, with its "Environmental justice" title is simply an effort to push the environmental justice social/political movement. – [[User:Srich32977|S. Rich]] ([[User talk:Srich32977|talk]]) 04:01, 15 April 2017 (UTC) |
||
*'''delete''' -there is pure [[WP:OR]] here as well as [[WP:SYN]] - the real topic of this <s>article</s> <u>essay</u> appears to be "Why coal mining is evil". (it may well be, but WP is not the place to make that argument). [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 23:11, 16 April 2017 (UTC) If my !vote didn't make it clear enough, the essay fails NPOV by miles. It isn't written to provide an encyclopedic summary of accepted knowledge about any topic, but rather to show that viewed through the lens of the environmental justice movement, coal mining in Appalachia has been a very bad thing. This is indeed what essays do. This is a "live tiger" in Wikipedia. (see [[WP:Beware of tigers]]) We have been calling these articles [[WP:POV forks]] for good reason. What this class is doing, is creating articles that view topic X from the POV of environmental justice. That is not OK in Wikipedia. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 04:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC) |
*'''delete''' -there is pure [[WP:OR]] here as well as [[WP:SYN]] - the real topic of this <s>article</s> <u>essay</u> appears to be "Why coal mining is evil". (it may well be, but WP is not the place to make that argument). [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 23:11, 16 April 2017 (UTC) If my !vote didn't make it clear enough, the essay fails NPOV by miles. It isn't written to provide an encyclopedic summary of accepted knowledge about any topic, but rather to show that viewed through the lens of the environmental justice movement, coal mining in Appalachia has been a very bad thing. This is indeed what essays do. This is a "live tiger" in Wikipedia. (see [[WP:Beware of tigers]]) We have been calling these articles [[WP:POV forks]] for good reason. What this class is doing, is creating articles that view topic X from the POV of environmental justice. That is not OK in Wikipedia. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 04:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC) |
||
Line 21: | Line 22: | ||
* '''Keep''' This article is very important in addressing an important Environmental Justice issue. Changes should be made to the article to make the connection between Appalachian mining and Environmental Justice more clear, but the sources referenced are very good and do point to a clear argument that this really is an Environmental Justice issue.[[User:Grayrock|Grayrock]] ([[User talk:Grayrock|talk]]) 04:32, 18 April 2017 (UTC) <small>— [[User:Grayrock|Grayrock]] ([[User talk:Grayrock|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Grayrock|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. </small> |
* '''Keep''' This article is very important in addressing an important Environmental Justice issue. Changes should be made to the article to make the connection between Appalachian mining and Environmental Justice more clear, but the sources referenced are very good and do point to a clear argument that this really is an Environmental Justice issue.[[User:Grayrock|Grayrock]] ([[User talk:Grayrock|talk]]) 04:32, 18 April 2017 (UTC) <small>— [[User:Grayrock|Grayrock]] ([[User talk:Grayrock|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Grayrock|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. </small> |
||
* '''KEEP''' This article is informative in regards to coal mining and the consequential environmental justice effects. This article should be kept on this page if necessary changes are made to make a neutral point of view. This is a really good reference for a new section on Environmental Justice of Mountain Top Mining: http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=jhdrp&sei-redir=1&referer=https%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fscholar%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Denvironmental%2Bjustice%2Bin%2Bappalchia%26btnG%3D%26as_sdt%3D1%252C5%26as_sdtp%3D#search=%22environmental%20justice%20appalchia%22 [[User:OrangeRock|OrangeRock]] ([[User talk:OrangeRock|talk]]) 04:36, 18 April 2017 (UTC) <small>— [[User:OrangeRock|OrangeRock]] ([[User talk:OrangeRock|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/OrangeRock|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. </small> |
* '''KEEP''' This article is informative in regards to coal mining and the consequential environmental justice effects. This article should be kept on this page if necessary changes are made to make a neutral point of view. This is a really good reference for a new section on Environmental Justice of Mountain Top Mining: http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=jhdrp&sei-redir=1&referer=https%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fscholar%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Denvironmental%2Bjustice%2Bin%2Bappalchia%26btnG%3D%26as_sdt%3D1%252C5%26as_sdtp%3D#search=%22environmental%20justice%20appalchia%22 [[User:OrangeRock|OrangeRock]] ([[User talk:OrangeRock|talk]]) 04:36, 18 April 2017 (UTC) <small>— [[User:OrangeRock|OrangeRock]] ([[User talk:OrangeRock|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/OrangeRock|contribs]]) has made [[Wikipedia:Single-purpose account|few or no other edits]] outside this topic. </small> |
||
* '''Comment''': I have changed my !vote to above to <i>keep</I> based on noticing that there is, in fact, plenty of strong [[WP:SECONDARY]] [[WP:RS]] in the article. I was distracted by the [[WP:LEDE]]'s [[WP:OR]] and [[WP:SYN]] and noticing too many [[WP:PRIMARY]] sources, and I regret I did not look closer, at all the sources the first. If the objectionable material and sources is cleared out so that the focus is on the good [[WP:SECONDARY]] sources, we can have a nice article that meets Wiki [[WP:PAG|standards]]. It will probably be shorter. --[[User:David Tornheim|David Tornheim]] ([[User talk:David Tornheim|talk]]) 20:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:25, 18 April 2017
Environmental justice and coal mining in Appalachia
- Environmental justice and coal mining in Appalachia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article one of many problematic ones created as a class project, deprodded by a student in the class. This is a POV intersection of two topics that in themselves are notable. StAnselm (talk) 21:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Delete The main problem I see with this is the title - if the Wikipedia editors started writing articles with titles like these all hell would break loose on Wikipedia. I think we need to maintain the same standard for WikiEdu. I noticed there is no article for "Coal Mining in Appalachia" which I think is a notable topic. I don't think there would be a problem with creating the article focusing on the environmental impact and then others could add to it. If any one section became too long that it started to overburden the article, then we would consider whether WP:SPINOUT was appropriate. Systemic bias is a real problem in some areas of Wikipedia, but I think right now most of the objection is due to proliferation of articles with titles that don't fit Wikipedia's encyclopedic style. Seraphim System (talk) 00:40, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- Delete, but salvage some content via cutting and pasting into another article Title not NPOV. Content quality issues in sections. Overtly political in some sections. Knox490 (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 14:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 14:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep, but remove WP:OR and WP:PRIMARY sources. This obscure sounding topic is clearly GNG|notable based on plenty WP:SECONDARY sources such as [1], [2], [3] and much more found in the article. Perhaps the title might be slightly simplified by widening the scope to "Env. Justice in Appalachia" or "Health Impacts in Appalachia" or "Disparity in Appalachia", etc., as a subheading of the wider scoped article. However, the topic is notable, so a full article is justified IMHO.
UserfyAsk students to carefully read the guide that comes with these courses and additionally WP:RS, WP:OR and WP:NPOV.It might be wise to work on these articles in a sandbox and bring these articles to WP:AfC for review before attempting publish in main space.--David Tornheim (talk) 04:10, 15 April 2017 (UTC) [revised 20:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)] - Delete – I am the editor who initiated the PROD and I suggested that Appalachia#Coal mining was the appropriate article in which to add environmental concerns. This article, with its "Environmental justice" title is simply an effort to push the environmental justice social/political movement. – S. Rich (talk) 04:01, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
- delete -there is pure WP:OR here as well as WP:SYN - the real topic of this
articleessay appears to be "Why coal mining is evil". (it may well be, but WP is not the place to make that argument). Jytdog (talk) 23:11, 16 April 2017 (UTC) If my !vote didn't make it clear enough, the essay fails NPOV by miles. It isn't written to provide an encyclopedic summary of accepted knowledge about any topic, but rather to show that viewed through the lens of the environmental justice movement, coal mining in Appalachia has been a very bad thing. This is indeed what essays do. This is a "live tiger" in Wikipedia. (see WP:Beware of tigers) We have been calling these articles WP:POV forks for good reason. What this class is doing, is creating articles that view topic X from the POV of environmental justice. That is not OK in Wikipedia. Jytdog (talk) 04:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Jytdog how do you feel about Free-market environmentalism? Seraphim System (talk) 06:14, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- The article and not the views in it, I guess you mean... and I guess you are asking how my rationale here would apply to a deletion !vote, there, if there was one. Well first, it is apples and oranges, topic-wise. That is one of a series of articles within political science/philiosophy, namely "Libertarian views on X", where X is a policy topic. Similarly we have a series on Socialism and within that Eco-socialism, and there are a whole slew of series and articles within them, like those. Those are apples. We don't have Libertarian perspectives on coal mining in Appalachia. That would also be an orange, that one could compare, topicwise. All that said, the article you asked about is very bad, very unsourced and full of OR etc. Does that answer you? Jytdog (talk) 07:27, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Jytdog how do you feel about Free-market environmentalism? Seraphim System (talk) 06:14, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
- Delete per POV but please salvage things for other pages--Cs california (talk) 07:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep This article is very important in addressing an important Environmental Justice issue. Changes should be made to the article to make the connection between Appalachian mining and Environmental Justice more clear, but the sources referenced are very good and do point to a clear argument that this really is an Environmental Justice issue.Grayrock (talk) 04:32, 18 April 2017 (UTC) — Grayrock (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- KEEP This article is informative in regards to coal mining and the consequential environmental justice effects. This article should be kept on this page if necessary changes are made to make a neutral point of view. This is a really good reference for a new section on Environmental Justice of Mountain Top Mining: http://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&context=jhdrp&sei-redir=1&referer=https%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fscholar%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Denvironmental%2Bjustice%2Bin%2Bappalchia%26btnG%3D%26as_sdt%3D1%252C5%26as_sdtp%3D#search=%22environmental%20justice%20appalchia%22 OrangeRock (talk) 04:36, 18 April 2017 (UTC) — OrangeRock (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Comment: I have changed my !vote to above to keep based on noticing that there is, in fact, plenty of strong WP:SECONDARY WP:RS in the article. I was distracted by the WP:LEDE's WP:OR and WP:SYN and noticing too many WP:PRIMARY sources, and I regret I did not look closer, at all the sources the first. If the objectionable material and sources is cleared out so that the focus is on the good WP:SECONDARY sources, we can have a nice article that meets Wiki standards. It will probably be shorter. --David Tornheim (talk) 20:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)