This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Wise use movement article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The problem is "wise use" isn't a broad coalition with "relatively centrist to extremist views." "wise use" is counterpoint to ecotourist. There are relatively moderate antienvironmentalist organisations (the Oregon Chamber of Commerce comes to mind), but they don't qualify as "wise use" because there neither extremists nor violent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antycrist ( talk • contribs) 09:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
I made balancing edits last nite and now find not only them gone but my comments about the in the descution too.
1) "wise use" is not a neutral term referring to both radical/violent anti-environmentalist and moderate business-over-environment groups. Just as there is a term ecoterrorist that apply to only radical/violent groups.
An instructive example comes from the Lake county (next county west of Burns) collage news. "... at this point Wise-Use members broak from the main protest and moved into a federal building. Wise-use groups, such as III% and supporter of Cliven Buddy, have been frustrated with the oderation of nonviolent groups like Oregon Farm Bureau and Oregon Chamber of Commerce,as well as the local community, over there unwillingness to use 'extralegal' tactics. ..." (note: I tiped this from a video broadcast)
2) The historical term it references was code for business masquerading as maintenance people such as the First head of the forest service.
3) The term is often used for any anty property regulation terrorism. An instructive example is the 1982 Oregonian artical: "The third failed attempt to repeal sb100 [the comprehensive planning and zoning law] lacked the violence of previous conflicts over sb100. Antycrist ( talk) 20:22, 12 February 2016 (UTC)This was primarily do to the 'wise-use' groups change in tactics." Antycrist ( talk)
This is not correct at least in Oregon. "wise use" is a anty property regulation terrorist group from the 70s that absorbed most of the Public Lands Transfer inititiave after the sagebrush rebellion Antycrist ( talk) 20:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC).
The result of the move request was: Moved to Wise use movement — Amakuru ( talk) 16:01, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Wise use → Wise-use movement – The article is about a political initiative i.e., a "movement" so that word should be in the title NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 11:47, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Tagging for POV - the arguments and citations seem to largely come from critics. K. Bog 14:22, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Wise use movement article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The problem is "wise use" isn't a broad coalition with "relatively centrist to extremist views." "wise use" is counterpoint to ecotourist. There are relatively moderate antienvironmentalist organisations (the Oregon Chamber of Commerce comes to mind), but they don't qualify as "wise use" because there neither extremists nor violent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antycrist ( talk • contribs) 09:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
I made balancing edits last nite and now find not only them gone but my comments about the in the descution too.
1) "wise use" is not a neutral term referring to both radical/violent anti-environmentalist and moderate business-over-environment groups. Just as there is a term ecoterrorist that apply to only radical/violent groups.
An instructive example comes from the Lake county (next county west of Burns) collage news. "... at this point Wise-Use members broak from the main protest and moved into a federal building. Wise-use groups, such as III% and supporter of Cliven Buddy, have been frustrated with the oderation of nonviolent groups like Oregon Farm Bureau and Oregon Chamber of Commerce,as well as the local community, over there unwillingness to use 'extralegal' tactics. ..." (note: I tiped this from a video broadcast)
2) The historical term it references was code for business masquerading as maintenance people such as the First head of the forest service.
3) The term is often used for any anty property regulation terrorism. An instructive example is the 1982 Oregonian artical: "The third failed attempt to repeal sb100 [the comprehensive planning and zoning law] lacked the violence of previous conflicts over sb100. Antycrist ( talk) 20:22, 12 February 2016 (UTC)This was primarily do to the 'wise-use' groups change in tactics." Antycrist ( talk)
This is not correct at least in Oregon. "wise use" is a anty property regulation terrorist group from the 70s that absorbed most of the Public Lands Transfer inititiave after the sagebrush rebellion Antycrist ( talk) 20:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC).
The result of the move request was: Moved to Wise use movement — Amakuru ( talk) 16:01, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Wise use → Wise-use movement – The article is about a political initiative i.e., a "movement" so that word should be in the title NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 11:47, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Tagging for POV - the arguments and citations seem to largely come from critics. K. Bog 14:22, 27 August 2018 (UTC)