Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intersectional environmentalism


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Draftify. Students are welcome to work on this in draft space, and that's where the content will be momentarily. If someone thinks this is worthy of a redirect to Leah_Thomas_(ecofeminist) or environmental justice, feel free. Star  Mississippi  02:22, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Intersectional environmentalism

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This article is currently an WP:OR/WP:SYNTH mess that suffers from deficient sourcing. Those sources include a blog run by a bank, a group blog, a scholarly work that does not mention environmentalism at all, a deadlink to what appears to be the "about us" page of a not-for-profit corporation run by Leah Thomas, an op-ed by Leah Thomas in a publication that doesn't even claim to be a news organization, and an op-ed by Leah Thomas in Marie Claire. My search for other information found a first-person interview with Leah Thomas published in The Cut, an interview with Thomas in a travel magazine, a popular press book by Leah Thomas, a brief review of that book by National Catholic Reporter, an op-ed by Leah Thomas in Teen Vogue, an ecotextile trade publication that does little more than name-check the topic, another op-ed by Leah Thomas (in Vogue), a piece from DW that more or less covers the topic as a brand of Environmental Justice, a transcript of a WaPo-hosted panel that covers it withing the context of environmental justice (Thomas is on the panel), an interview with Leah Thomas that describes intersectional environmentalism as being environmental justice, and a handful of college newspaper viewpoints and stories. In other words, the topic of intersectional environmentalism doesn't actually appear to be independently notable from the topic of environmental justice; the two appear to be framed as synonyms even by those who seek to promote the term. At most, this term appears to be an alternative name to environmental justice that was proposed by a single activist.

Since the content of the current page is an OR/SYNTH mess and the topic is not independently notable of environmental justice, I propose that this be redirected to environmental justice. — Mhawk10 (talk) 19:16, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Law, Politics, Science,  and Environment. — Mhawk10 (talk) 19:18, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * As a friendly note for those doing google searches, the Leah Thomas who is the environmentalist that coined the phrase is not Lia Thomas and is not the cyclist who currently occupies the Leah Thomas page. Sourcing is probably enough to get the environmentalist a page, but I don't think the same can be said for this neologism. — Mhawk10 (talk) 19:24, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Update: Leah Thomas (ecofeminist) is now a page. — Mhawk10 (talk) 20:21, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for creating the Leah Thomas (ecofeminist) page! The current intersectional environmentalism page represents student work that is very much in progress. Due to the debate around this page, I would suggest giving the class a few more weeks, however then revisiting the discussion to merge with Environmental justice, or merge with the new page for Leah Thomas. Littlesalmon (talk) 21:20, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect A merge of some content about intersectionality would be relevant for Environmental justice, but this is not ready for a stand-alone article. I see that last month appropriately removed more than half of the page for redundancy and content irrelevant to either environmentalism or intersectionality. Still, there is content irrelevant to environmentalism like "High Risk jobs are often held by people who are immigrants especially undocumented ones" with an unrelated source. I would encourage  and other course instructors to create new articles as WP:Drafts. Reywas92Talk 20:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Redirect and Draftify: as the article currently stands, it is not ready for publication. It is a WikiEd project, but since my original merge proposal and removal of blatantly irrelevant material, I have seen little work by the class participants or anyone else to improve it. I have already mentioned to that the class project would have been better created in the draft space.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:05, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect Per Reywas92. Thriley (talk) 21:10, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Subject of scholarly research.


 * Clean up is all that is required and a good faith reminder of WP:NEXIST. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 02:11, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The citations presented above appear don't appear to demonstrate that the topic of is covered significantly.
 * The first "source" mentions "intersectional environmentalism" a whopping one time—the title of a parenthetical citation.
 * The second source that allegedly reflects "scholarly research" is an op-ed in OpenDemocracy. This is an opinion piece, not a piece of scholarly literature.
 * The third "source" is an anthropological review of "intersectional ecologies", which is a different topic altogether that focuses on the intersection of anthropology and ecology.
 * The fourth "source" does not so much mention the term "intersectional environmentalism". In fact, it's explicitly a paper about environmental justice in Palestine, which helps to support the notion that the redirect target makes sense.
 * The fifth source addresses the topic, although it's published in the Journal of Children's Literature which appears to be well out-of-field given that it's published by and English teacher's association.
 * The sixth "source" does not so much as mention the term "intersectional environmentalism", let alone cover it significantly.
 * The seventh "source" likewise does not so much as mention the term "intersectional environmentalism".
 * I lack full access to the eighth source, but the snippets I can pull out from google scholar don't appear to include the phrase "intersectional environmentalism".
 * The ninth "source" does not so much as mention the term "intersectional environmentalism".
 * The tenth "source" does not so much as mention the term "intersectional environmentalism".
 * The eleventh "source" does not so much as mention the term "intersectional environmentalism". It's plainly a paper that's about environmental justice that uses the lens of intersectionality, but this isn't WP:SIGCOV of the topic at hand.
 * The twelfth source would at first appear to cover the concept in the context of the Green Belt Movement within its fourth chapter. But what the book is describing is something that's different from the intersectional environmentalism of Leah Thomas—the book is writing about a political strategy applied in Kenya, not a theory of justice. In other words, there are multiple topics with the same name.
 * While I reserve judgement on the eighth source (I'll need to head to a library), the whole remainder of the sources either don't cover the topic significantly or are written in a journal (one that focuses on kid's books) that's not reliable in this context (intersectional environmentalism). As such, WP:GNG is not met even if the sole source I cannot access were to cover this topic significantly. — Mhawk10 (talk) 05:04, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This response conflates methods of assessing a biography with that of a concept; it's not possible to analyse the subject matter here akin to a BLP or with the use of CTRL+F. I'll use somewhat simplified dichotomies to illustrate, but I believe they are useful, nevertheless. We differentiate forms of environmentalism (eg Free-market environmentalism) as the means for achieving sustainability.  There is a conceptual difference between environmentalism and sustainability, the former seeking the latter. We can differentiate between environmental justice and the means by which it is done, eg intersectional environmentalism or, purely for argument's sake, free-market environmentalism. This is similar to how one conceptually differentiates socialism from socialist movements, feminism from feminist movements. By definition, intersectional environmentalism is about movements, tactics, and strategy, not about end states, ie environmental justice.  Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 12:53, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
 * , you may have a point here (the means differs from the goal), but that doesn't change the need for notability, as demonstrated by significant coverage from sources independent of the movement. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:39, 26 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Redirect and Draftify per Reywas92 and WikiDan61. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 20:29, 23 April 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.