Talk:Timeline of environmental events

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Environment
Portal		 This environment-related article is part of the Environment WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment.
The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
See WikiProject Environment and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
List This article has been rated as List-Class on the assessment scale.

--Alex 08:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Americentric

As it currently stands this timeline has a huge bias toward events that occurred in the USA. Alan Liefting 00:13, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

(1) Probably, yup,..., freedom of speech gets US there. — I am implying anything and everything with that comment. Hard Raspy Sci
(1a) This in no way is intended to overshadow healthy extra-Americentric environmentalism, but aid those (not like you or I) that do not have the local resource of information. Hard Raspy Sci
(2) Its good to see that you have worked heavily on Timeline of environmental history of New Zealand and others. Hard Raspy Sci
(3) I was absolutely surprised to find that this article did not exist yet, and really expected someone to come forth and say that it is a duplicate. But really this is a short list, and it was what I could round up from Wikipedia and US Gov sites. I really didn't have time to do a thorough background in all avenues as it was just created recently. Hard Raspy Sci
(4) By all means add to it, make it a more world scope article, edit, or whatever... As you can see not all of the Environmental legislation is linked or not found on Wikipedia yet, and I do not believe this article is anywhere near completion Hard Raspy Sci 20:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Environmental vs Environment.

This article contains geological, meterological and weather related events. These affect the environment. The word environmental is generally a reference to the effects of human activity on the environment. Alan Liefting 11:39, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

The first definition of "environmental" here is "the circumstances, objects, or conditions by which one is surrounded" and WP:NC says article names "should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists." I think the article name is reasonable. Are you proposing a change? —RandallJones 22:58, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
I would like to remove all the geological, meterological and evolutionary events and then rename the article as Timeline of human induced environmental events, Timeline of antropogenic environmental events or suchlike. This prevents a double-up of events that are already on other timelines and reduces clutter and size of the timeline. It will also give it a clearer focus. Alan Liefting 03:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rename article?

I suggest renaming the article to Timeline of anthropogenic environmental events. This will give it a clearer focus, reduce double ups with events on other environmental timelines and will be a manageable size. Alan Liefting 23:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea, i'm ok for the new title but we haven't to lose the informations about the natural environmental events, we can split in two articles, if we aren' sure it's already specifically described somewhere else --Ayanoa 00:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Natural environmental events are (should be) covered in the geological and meterological timelines. Alan Liefting 05:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


Problem 1 The new name does not reach to people who do not understand the subject.

The timeline's title has to be simple, by definition.
The expression or meaning of the subject matter is expressed and contained in the primary defining paragraph.
Changing the name of timeline is an old issue, besides the subject matter fits, its general.

Problem 2 90% of the world's population does not know what anthropogenic means.

Its contextual usage may even mislead some, becoming less clear.
It would only guarantee further debate about what event is anthropogenic or not...endless issue.

Problem 3 Other, timelines, I am reducing, modifying, and erasing because of that overlap.

Several persons are working on several of those other timelines in various wiki-projects along with myself to correct those uneccessary overlaps and go through various cleanup projects, etc.

Problem 4 The prescribed changes will cause information mismanagement and loss.


The answer is to leave the title alone, edit the content as always. This timeline has grown and improved greatly over the past year. Which may mean, that on occasion a new author or editor may inappropriately put an item here which may belong elsewhere. The last part about overlap isn't that great, since an occasional overlap among timelines really only fosters learning....which is really the point. Do not change, its already being worked on, in many ways... -- Hard Raspy Sci 15:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with a number of your points:
  • The timeline will reach anyone who clicks on the link or does a search.
  • A timeline title must be specific to ensure the timeline does not end up with irrelevant entries.
  • The word anthropogenic can be used in the title regardless of assumptions on how may people know what it means. People come here to find out what stuff means.
  • There will be no loss of information but there will be a reduction in unnecessary overlap.
The word environmantal is too broad. It needs an additional word as a qualification. My main desire is to remove the geological events.Alan Liefting 09:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Well, otherwise you are talking about an ecological timeline...making an ecological timeline is ok. Hard Raspy Sci 03:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Rather moving geology out of environment...take a minute to think what you are saying, though. But it really sounds like you want to make an Ecology timeline for Earth. Or something of that nature, and I don't think there is any reason not to. But stripping down environmental to make a more specific topic just brings it to one of its base studies: biology, hydrology, geology, anthropology, zoology, ecology, climatology, ... and so on. Hard Raspy Sci 03:38, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
No, I do not mean developing an ecology timeline. I want a timeline the documents environmental issues. Ecology is a scientific study of ecosystems but I want a timeline of anthropogenic effects on ecosystems and the biosphere in general. The word environmental is increasingly used in the context of "human effects on the natural environment" so it makes sense to dedicate a timeline to it. There can be (or is?) timelines for biology, hydrology, geology, anthropology, zoology, ecology, climatology, ... and so on. -- Alan Liefting talk 00:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
From the article's introduction, it sounds like a timeline of environmentalism. In saying "increasingly used", you admit that is not the actual definition of the word "environmental". Maybe "timeline of environmentalist issues" would work. The WP:POV is obvious. The broad range of inclusion criteria also oddly biases toward biblical theories. Potatoswatter (talk) 15:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)