This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
A fact from Dumping in Dixie appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 January 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that Robert D. Bullard has emerged as the "father of environmental justice" since the publication of his 1990 book, Dumping in Dixie?
Latest comment: 2 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Other problems: - All three of the cited sources note that the book was the first book to discuss environmental (in)justice, but the hook seems more cautious in saying "one of the first". These three reliable sources all say it was the first, so I think it is fine to take a firmer stance. Additionally, could the Robert D. Bullard article be linked into the hook somehow? For example, "... that Dumping in Dixie by Robert D. Bullard ..." I think this could give more context.
QPQ: Done.
Overall: In the "Reaction" section of the article, could there be given more context for who the people giving the reviews are? Especially for those without articles on Wikipedia, I think they should be introduced with their current job/position to show they have authority. For example, this is done in the "Unfavorable" sub-section where it says "Similarly, Texas A&M University professor John Thomas posits...," there should be a brief introduction like this for all of the names mentioned under "Reaction". This looks good overall though. Riley1012 (talk) 01:45, 18 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Riley1012: I have added ALT1 per your suggestions. I added journals to the other comments in that section since I am unsure of the exact institutions/positions (maybe Raj3015 would know as the creator of the article) Thanks, eviolite(talk)04:59, 18 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
- All three of the cited sources note that the book was the first book to discuss environmental (in)justice, but the hook seems more cautious in saying "one of the first". These three reliable sources all say it was the first, so I think it is fine to take a firmer stance. Additionally, could the Robert D. Bullard article be linked into the hook somehow? For example, "... that Dumping in Dixie by Robert D. Bullard ..." I think this could give more context.
In the "Reaction" section of the article, could there be given more context for who the people giving the reviews are? Especially for those without articles on Wikipedia, I think they should be introduced with their current job/position to show they have authority. For example, this is done in the "Unfavorable" sub-section where it says "Similarly, Texas A&M University professor John Thomas posits...," there should be a brief introduction like this for all of the names mentioned under "Reaction". This looks good overall though. Riley1012 (talk) 01:45, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
@Eviolite: ALT1 and the new changes look good to me. Thanks, Riley1012 (talk) 01:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)