Talk:Dirty, dangerous and demeaning

message: There were a number of problems with the article which were removed and put back in.
This article must focus on the term dirty, dangerous, and demeaning and how it is used. Otherwise we just get a pile of original research.
This article was originally extremely US-centric.
There is nothing to say that these jobs are necessarily well paid - very often they aren't. Perhaps in the United States, under certain circumstances, but even now many of these jobs are paid poorly in the US. 
There isn't "mystique" around these jobs - people do feel detached from them, but they're generally low-status. Frederick Taylor's theories of work have very little to do with this article. The list of unions contains only those from the United States - are we going to put every union that represents these workers? There would be thousands. If we want to talk about the United States, create a United States section. I cut out the mention of specific migration flows for the same reason - very US-centric, and there are many labour flows that need talking about.
Mostlyharmless (talk) 20:53, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you think needs adding to the article, and more importantly, why do you think those things are relevant to the term 3D? Mostlyharmless (talk) 21:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: All your sources on migrant working conditions have the implied or stated premises that there are domestic workers initially employed in 3D jobs and most migrant workers are paid non-standard wages. The migrant workers are only fulfilling a shortage in labor and this shortage manifests itself in 3D jobs. Following this logic then most migrant workers are employed by 3D jobs. Are you are assuming that all people employed in 3D jobs are migrant workers? 128.12.169.7 (talk) 02:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for your recent contributions to the Dirty, Dangerous and Demeaning article. Your edits concerning low wage undesirable occupations are off topic and should be on a different page, possible one concerning low wage occupations. Your writing leaves something to be desired and has a slanted POV that comes through in a tone of personal experience. If you have experiences to share with employment in a 3D occupation this could be an addition to the page. Please return the links to 3D occupations, labor organization, economic principles of supply and demand and add your immigrant issues accordingly. The cited references existing on the page provide the necessary references. I have asked for assistance from the labor portal and additional references concerning pay rates are forthcoming. It could be taken as common knowledge these occupation are higher wage, and economic theory indicates higher pay but the published validation you ask for is not difficult to find on the bureau of labor statistics web site. They publish an occupational outlook handbook each year.Granite07 (talk) 22:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes

message: After a first glance at the edits in dispute and at the comments above, here are my thoughts:
* The comment above "If you have experiences to share with employment in a 3D occupation this could be an addition to the page" is off-target. Articles are not about our experiences; they are about what is verifiable in reliable sources. From Wikipedia:Verifiability: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that readers should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed."
* Most editing disputes can be resolved by applying Wikipedia's policies and guidelines such as verifiability, WP:NPOV, WP:OR, WP:RS.
* The article paragraph beginning "Frederick Winslow Taylor perceived the worker as a component of a larger system" has no references to indicate that reliable sources have discussed this in connection with 3D. Remember we are documenting what reliable sources have said about 3D; we aren't writing about our own opinions or experiences. That paragraph should stay out.
* The list of occupations considered to be 3D seem appropriate but must be verfiied from reliable sources. The cited reference demonstrates danger, but I'm not sure that it demonstrates 3D. The following section about "not on the list but also 3D" has no references to verify that reliable sources consider them to be 3D jobs. Therefore, it must go.
* The list of labor unions is not directly related to 3D and again there are no refs to RS to verify that there is any connection to 3D.
Think verifiability. Unverifiable statement can always be deleted. Verifiable statements cannot be removed unless they violate other policies or guidelines. Sbowers3 (talk) 00:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: View of outsider

message: I had thought this might be an interesting slant on the Muri concept of Lean/TPS but in fact it adds nothing to Lean itself. I cannot see any use of 3D within the Lean literature or here that is verifiable. Therefore I think it is confusing to keep it in Lean concepts where it is at best a subsection of Muri and not a concept in itself. Whilst Taylor is cited on the Lean Manufacturing page so is Benjamin Franklin neither were part of Lean. Facius (talk) 10:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome to Granite07's ownership of this page. Mostlyharmless (talk) 00:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Given this discussion and the article I will remove Lean concept category 

message: Take a look at these sources and see what you think of the content
* page 18, a power to the edge concept, lean manufacturing and 3D source, http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=LTE-pqNP9QAC&oi=fnd&pg=PR3&dq=%22lean+manufacturing%22+%22dirty,+dangerous%22&ots=oHK_kOS3wA&sig=g7C5IOhZV2P0a3eitvbn916Zl70#PPA18,M1
* page 13, already cited in the article but makes clear 3D and construction by a well respected researcher. Also shows 3D is a lean manufacturing term by using automation of 3D jobs as an example. http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build96/PDF/b96085.pdf
* page 353, discusses automotive industry and its image as a 3D occupation. No automotive company is competitive these days without a lean manufacturing process. http://freyssenet.com/files/Enriching%20Production%20-complete%20book.pdf#page=341
Granite07 (talk) 05:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future Sources For Review

message: "dirty, dangerous, demanding" OR "dirty, dangerous, demeaning" OR  "dirty, dangerous, difficult"
n = 164
Context:
65% Migrant = 103;
1% Lean = 1;
3% Robotics = 5;
9% working environment = 14;
22% not categorized (translation) = 35;
Good example of "working environment"
Chen, L. & Eriksson, T. "Vacancy Duration, Vacancy Characteristics and the Business Cycle – Evidence from Firm-level Data", 2008 International Symposium on Contemporary Labor Economics "Inequality and Poverty" Wang Yanan Institute for Studies in Economics (WISE), Xiamen University, Xiamen, China, December 12-13, 2008 
Assuming the papers not categorized due to translation are referencing the categorizations at the same rates observed and distributed accordingly:
*84% Migrant
* 1% Lean
* 4% Robotics
*11% Working environments
While 84% of papers are referencing migrant issues they are at the core within the context of "working environments". It does not appear that any of these papers would support the assertion that the term dirty, dangerous, demanding is in exclusively associated with migrant issues. On the contrary the context of use in the migrant issue papers implies the term is associated with a type of work, which is supported by the 11% of papers that explicitly provide this definition. Further since the topic of migrant issues is better documented and published than the details of dirty, dangerous, demanding occupations, prorating for this difference in population of publications would likely indicate a similar scale in the terms use. Meaning that the term dirty, dangerous, demanding is used relatively just as commonly in reference to migrant issues as to a work type independent of migrant issues.
The survey of published papers given above is incomplete, a paper written by a US National Institute of Science and Technology scientist did not appear in the results of the search and therefore indicates other similar documents are not represented. In this document dirty, dangerous, difficult is presented as the "essence of the construction workplace".
Stone, W. C. "NIST Construction Automation Program, Report No. 2. NIST Construction Automation Workshop. Proceedings." March 20-31, 1995. NISTIR 5856; 156 p. May 1996. National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST Construction Automation Program, Report No. 2. NIST Construction Automation Workshop. Proceedings. March 20-31, 1995, 1996. pg 13. 
Granite07 (talk) 20:12, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Google Scholar Search

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Dirty, dangerous and demeaning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071014181222/http://iom.fi/files/Publications/2007/PIELAMI_Project_Report.pdf to http://iom.fi/files/Publications/2007/PIELAMI_Project_Report.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:31, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 18:15, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Dirty, dangerous and demeaning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081122004049/http://oaks.korean.net/download/pdf/05.Usefulinformation_e.pdf to http://oaks.korean.net/download/pdf/05.Usefulinformation_e.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080106202021/http://www.comebackalive.com:80/df/dngrjobs.htm to http://www.comebackalive.com/df/dngrjobs.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:16, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified