Talk:Environmental movement

message: The material on James Lovelock is pertinent, but I agree, needs sourcing. Please document references. Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 14:13, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms: sources? 

message: *Sculpting Solutions: Art–Science Collaborations in Sustainability by Mrill Ingram in July-August 2012 Environment magazine.
99.181.143.157 (talk) 06:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As a reference for what? References are used to support content and usually (or should be) provided when the content is added. Vsmith (talk) 12:27, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add reference here, or where? 

message: Thanks for efforts to globalize this article. In it's current, more geographically diverse form, some article restructuring is needed, in my opinion. After the article lead, it now jumps right in to environmentalism in the U.S. Before it does so, though, some broader, definitional elaboration would be helpful, such as the material currently later in the article on 'scope of the movement'. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 10:46, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Have made a few tweaks, towards further globalizing the article. Despite the helpful additions, it remains US-centric and in need of further restructuring. Some of the material in the US section may be more appropriate in the Environmental movement in the United States article. A summary of key perspectives from related articles on Australia, New Zealand and South Africa would be useful to add here, too. Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 11:01, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Article structure remains rather jumbled, with broad overview information, then country-specific information, then topical information. There are, in my opinion, probably too many different -- and diverse -- subtopics included within this article at present. Reorganization needed... Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 20:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article structure 

message: Two different names; same movement DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 17:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Ecology movement]] 

message: In the text it states:
Deep Ecology is an ideological spinoff of the ecology movement that views the diversity and integrity of the planetary ecosystem, in and for itself, as its primary value.
Can we add: Followers of this ideology can be called deep green environmentalists ?
In the Deep green environmentalism article, we can then put the following:
Similar to dark greens, "deep greens" put most of the blame of the current environmental problems on the industry, and also follow an anti-consumerist ideology. For individuals, they advocate adopting a simple/low-tech lifestyle, yet accept using green technologies whenever this is not possible. They also follow a non-anthropocentric environmental ideology. They also believe that the collapse of the current society, due to environmental difficulties, is at hand and thus also prepare for this collapse. 
81.242.248.237 (talk) 09:13, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Deep green environmentalism

message: neutrality of critisism is really quetionable  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.167.146.26 (talk) 15:40, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Several examples of anti-environmental bias exist throughout Wikipedia. This issue is now being discussed here. Jarble (talk) 05:06, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  neutrality of critisism  

message: I performed the merge. Very little was salvageable material—either unsourced or unsourced and biased. I'd encourage those who are interested to look back at the version of the ecology movement page and rework and find sources for unsourced material. Karmos (talk) 06:14, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Ecology movement 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Environmental movement. 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/20110927003158/http://www.gis.net/~rwe/links.html to http://www.gis.net/~rwe/links.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100721082740/http://www.creationcare.org:80/resources/scripture.php to http://www.creationcare.org/resources/scripture.php
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 05:39, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "The Society attracted growing support from the suburban middle-classes and influenced the passage of the Sea Birds Preservation Act in 1869". That's interesting because the Society was formed (as The Plumage League) only 20 years latter (February 1889). אביהו (talk) 10:03, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time line Comment 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Environmental movement. 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/20140806070246/http://www.visitcumbria.com/rawnsley.htm to http://www.visitcumbria.com/rawnsley.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120602185018/http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/servlet/file/store5/item740098/version1/National%20Trust%20Acts%201907-1971%20post%20Order%202005.pdf to http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/servlet/file/store5/item740098/version1/National%20Trust%20Acts%201907-1971%20post%20Order%202005.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:24, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why is it that we let the world face a threat we've been known was coming for more than 100 years. Can the world come together to survive together? Jorgedmngz5 (talk) 07:22, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evaluation Question 

message: I propose merging Environmental movement into Environmentalism. I think the content in the movement can easily be explained in the context of "environmentalism", and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Environmentalism.FatalSubjectivities FatalSubjectivities (talk) 13:20, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Unsure. I think its still good to distinguish the two as this article is more about the social and political movement, whilst the other is about the ideology or set of values that underpins it. Kind of like how women's liberation movement is separate from feminism. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 20:55, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

text: Oppose as per above. Libcub (talk) 23:56, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

text: Support - The two articles are very close together in scope. I disagree with @Arcahaeoindris's comparison to the "women's liberation movement" vs "feminism". If anything, the WLM refers to a specific movement within a specific time period, which is more or less a subset of feminism, which is a wider topic that has been represented by multiple movements throughout history. On the other hand, the article "environmental movement" is not really discussing a specific movement but is instead discussing a  range of movements; which is basically what the article "environmentalism" already does. If "environmental movement" isn't discussing a specific movement, then it serves no real purpose. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 13:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment may not be helpful but note that there is also a separate article called Feminist movement to Feminism Arcahaeoindris (talk) 14:26, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Support the merging of Feminist movement into Feminism. Fourmidable (talk) 19:06, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose on the grounds that the combined article would be over 100k (so the claim of no problem with article size doesn't seem to to hold). The articles address an important topic best covered over several linked pages. Klbrain (talk) 09:43, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

text: Support  merge and rationalisation. The two pages contain extensive duplications of information. The movement page is also too US biased and not adequately representative of global realities. The argument that ideologies exist as separate from those who generate them is a POV and IMO flawed in current sociological thinking. Pointing at other similar duplications does not answer the point. The rationalisation of content can address the concern re size.   Tytire (talk) 11:17, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

text: Support. This article is general, not like "women's liberation movement" that is the name of a specific movement. --Fourmidable (talk) 19:01, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

text: Oppose the article size is massive so then it would be a section that would need to be split off ... Sebbog13 (talk) 22:00, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge 

message: — Assignment last updated by Marcplummer82 (talk) 00:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Media, Activism, and Social Movements