Talk:Green-collar worker

Not a widely accepted term.

Can anyone provide examples such as scholarly studies that provide support that this is a accepted term within the academic community. It seems to me that until the term becomes widely used it should be merged with Ecological economics.

Agreed. The first time I ever heard this term was in this year's presidential campaign. As far as I can tell, this is more of a catch-phrase than anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plasticbadge (talk • contribs) 02:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

You're kidding, right? Verifyable use over a few decades doesn't dictate that it's an accepted term or anything other than a 'catch-phrase'? Centerone (talk) 05:09, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Source for Table

could somenody provide a source for the table. thanks 82.35.117.88 (talk) 22:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I might GUESS that the source for the table is from the previous quote with the same year.. i.e. the year in the table are 1980 and 1997 -- and there is a 1997 quote from above it. Now, I might also think they _might_ have messed up a bit.. reversing the years in the chart, but that is just speculation on my part -- as why would the percentage of the number of green collar jobs go down from 1980 to 1997? Can someone figure out who posted the chart? If it's the same person who added the 1997 quote, then this might be a fairly likely source of the table. Centerone (talk) 04:40, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I may be wrong, but I am guessing that the years on the table are correct. It seem there actually was a BIG decrease in the environmental sector[1]. I remember hearing it stated on some TV news show as if it was a commonly-known fact; it shocked me too and disturbed me deeply, prodding me to find out why. Shanoman (talk) 08:11, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Military Workers.

Green Collar has also been used in many instances to refer to people who are or were in the military sector, typically soldiers. I have seen this referenced in this manner in a number of places and sources. I'm quite shocked to hear of this as a term for eco-working types. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.156.105 (talk) 23:57, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you provide any references for this claim? Centerone (talk) 19:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, you could check this site, http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Green%20Collar. I don't think it's the best reference but it still could help.Freedom Fighter 1988 (talk) 10:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but it's a totally unverifiable source that seems unconfirmed by other examples, not to mention their example sentence doesn't make any sense for it's origin -- that John is in the Air Force; I mean I could _believe_ that 'green collar' in military usage came from the color of some military uniforms, but a majority of the airforce's uniforms are not green. Centerone (talk) 09:19, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

It's in Metal Gear Solid 4. That's your reference. Boom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.46.157.149 (talk) 17:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Hardee har har. Yes, because hey video games are verifiable reliable sources. Thanks a LOT! Centerone (talk) 18:43, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I've added this usage as it is used specifically in Metal Gear Solid 4, without referencing wider usage, and supported it with a quote from the game that gives context. The game itself is given in {{cite video game}} to cite its own usage (in line with WP:SELFSOURCE). — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 16:24, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Greenwashing Nuclear Power

This page is being used as part of a campaign to greenwash nuclear power.

Nuclear power engineers would not consider themselves green collar workers, and I suspect this is not what the referenced articles state. (I am not about to go through them all right this instant.) Centerone (talk) 09:24, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I would agree, it really doesn't seem like they fit here, and the only citiation which even refers to green collar workers is the first one, and with a name like it does, it ain't a surprise.--Space 20:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spaceoff (talk • contribs)

I am still extremely bothered by the inclusion of nuclear workers in this page. Nuclear workers would not and do not consider themselves green collar workers. While the inclusion of nuclear engineers is now referenced, at very least some of the references are poor and should be removed. Particularly the first reference (right now #2) which links to world nuclear news; this is not a reliable source but rather is simply the propaganda arm of the world nuclear association. Centerone (talk) 08:02, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Green-collar worker. 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/20160115001453/http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110%3AH.R.6.ENR%3A to http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110%3AH.R.6.ENR%3A
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080127135930/http://units.aps.org/units/fps/energy/bodansky.cfm to http://units.aps.org/units/fps/energy/bodansky.cfm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071016045725/http://russp.org/nucfacts.html to http://russp.org/nucfacts.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070205103749/http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html to http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:13, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Green-collar worker. 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/20090327101806/http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~aubrecht/coalvsnucMarcon.pdf to http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~aubrecht/coalvsnucMarcon.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080820161040/http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2007/11/14/consumed5_pm_2 to http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2007/11/14/consumed5_pm_2/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:52, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Introductory paragraph. First footnote

Footnote # 1 refers to an article in the online magazine Slate, by Forrest Wickman, "Blue Collar White Collar: Why do we use these terms?", Slate May 1 2012. But the linked reference to the phrase, "Green Collar" in Slate leads back to this wikipedia article. I don't think this sort of self-referral is in accordance with Wikipedia rules. Not to mention that the introductory paragraph is not supposed to be footnoted, or didn't used to be. Mballen (talk) 06:15, 21 June 2021 (UTC)