Talk:Environmental philosophy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Environment (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment 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.
Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Review of Additions[edit]

I'm reviewing your article as part of the article creating process for Anthropology of Environment and Society at Mount Allison University. I think the Modern History section added a lot of important contemporary information on environmental philosophy, but it would be interesting to find out about more environmental philosophers and more dates of events in the history of environmental philosophy. I'm not sure why contemporary issues with the environment have their own section as you could just link to the main article of List of environmental issues or have them in a paragraph (or lead section) rather than bullet pointing well-known environmental issues. Also, the list of main issues in the lead section might fit better in an added section to the article. The additions seem well referenced and the content neutral. The article has been very well improved. Chaoticallyc (talk) 16:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

MTA Peer Review[edit]

Might want to explain the picture. Also might want to work on quotation format (if the lists are quotations). You could discuss / explain the history of this philosophy a bit more too. Srorourke (talk) 16:01, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Wonderfully written article! Very informative and strives for a neutral point of view. Also there is a very interesting choice of image, you might want to elaborate on its relevance in the caption, but environmental art is definitely something involved in envoronmental philosophy. You might also want to involve some other perspectives and arguments that counter deep ecology (eg shallow ecology, the historical western man vs. nature view, religious philosophies on nature). Rllegge (talk) 16:13, 20 November 2012 (UTC)