Knowledge

:Featured article candidates/Voluntary Human Extinction Movement/archive1 - Knowledge

Source 📝

425:
Economist". This is a fairly extraordinary claim, and is referenced only to a tongue in cheek speculative article from one of magazine's Christmas issues (which traditionally include several such lighthearted articles). I've been reading The Economist for well over a decade, and have never seen any references to such a position (in fact, The Economist generally advocates
234:"Knight, however, believes that even if humans become more environmentally friendly, they could still return to environmentally destructive lifestyles and thus should be eliminated." – Perhaps I am missing a point in American usage, but I'm pretty sure that the 'thus' should be 'hence' or 'therefore', as the sentence otherwise would mean that humans should be eliminated 343:
Ormrod in the second paragraph of ideology. As far as your last point goes, I've added a couple statements from Knight where he says that the group hasn't gotten a great reception/is unlikely to succeed. I'm not too sure what else to put there, most sources tend to take it for granted that they're not having much of an impact.
593:) that the article's only image is used under an appropriate fair use claim. It might actually be a free image though, as the organisation's website states that "Except where noted, works on this site are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License" and no exception for this image is identified. 538:
I don't own the same edition of Weisman as what was consulted in this article so I can't verify the page numbers, but the statements attributed to this book in refs 5a, 5c and 17 check out to my 2008 Virgin Books edition (5a,c to p. 242 and 17 to p. 243). I'm not sure about 5b though; my edition says
342:
Alright, thanks for your comments--you have a good eye for prose issues. I think I made all of your suggested changes. As far as the "one-man band" goes: basically yes, there are a few other members, but Knight pretty much runs it all. The only thing I could find about differing views is the quote by
551:
Reference 18: The article says that VHEMT's aim is "in many ways laudable" when you've just used "laudable". He doesn't 'question' "whether compassion for the planet can drive humans to voluntary extinction", but actually describes such a notion as being absurd (particularly the voluntary component
534:
Reference 1a: the article says that Knight lives in Portland, but not that he's a native of this city. References 1b and 1d check out. 1f: the references says the researcher counted "close to 400 people on Mr Knight’s mailing list", when you say that there were 'around 400'. I suggest changing this
405:
In both cases, without the comma the sentence could easily be misread as implying (using the words of the first sentence here, but it applies to both) that reproduction causes extinction, ie with the last clause ("cause extinction") being bound to "reproduction" rather than being bound to "abstain
176:
At the risk of causing the extinction of the human race and—even worse—the end of Knowledge, I am co-nominating this article for featured status with Mitch Ames. The content disputes that dominated the talk page (and spilled over to ANI) for a while have finally been resolved, and the article has
424:
Those changes look good to me, though a clearer statement on the movement's lack of success would be helpful, though as you note this is obviously self-evident. As another comment though, I'm going to take issue with the statement that "Voluntary extinction is seen as a laudable goal by The
320:
The 'ideology' section makes it appear that this 'movement' is really a one-man band as there's almost no coverage of differing views within its members. Is this correct? (though there probably isn't much room for debate in an organisation with such a clear cut - and absolute -
365:
because nobody agreed with them so everyone kept breeding. I'm not aware of specific references that indicate what sort of impact they are having - ie whether a significant (relative to the entire human population) number of people have chosen not to breed because of them.
177:
passed GA, been copyedited, and been peer reviewed. I think we've found virtually all of the coverage they have received in quality sources, and I believe that the article is now as neutral as is possible. I hope you agree that it meets the FA criteria.
117: 302:"Knight publishes the group's newsletter and serves as a spokesman for the movement." - 'Knight publishes the group's newsletter and is one of its spokesmen' perhaps? (including both 'group' and 'movement' in the same sentence is confusing) 248:"Philosophers Steven Best and Douglas Kellner view VHEMT's stance as extreme, but they note that the movement formed in response to what the group sees as extreme anthropocentrism." – I have no idea what this sentence is trying to tell me. 124: 327:
The 'reception' section's focus on what various writers have said about the organisation seems to miss the point that the organisation appears to have had no impact at all on the general public, and is hugely unlikely to ever have any.
429:
populations in developed countries and is relaxed about population issues in general). This and the following sentence should be dropped unless you can find a secondary source which states that this is the magazine's actual position.
305:"Many commentators view its platform as unacceptably extreme, though some have applauded their perspective." - who's applauding who here? (read literally, this says that some commentators have applauded other commentators views) 299:"who became involved in the environmental movement in the 1970s and thereafter concluded that human extinction is the best solution to the problems facing the Earth's biosphere and humanity." - 'is' should be 'was', I think 539:
that he "posts charts" at "Earth Day fairs and environmental conferences", but not that he speaks at them (which implies that he's been invited to speak as part of the conference program), so please double-check your copy.
444:
Ok, I removed the bits about The Economist and the laudable goal and so on. (I was actually unaware of the Christmas issue thing, my mistake.) I'll ping Mitch and see if he can think up a good way to put it.
388:
I disagree with both of Nick-D's statements that the comma is unnecessary. Both sentences to which he refers have the same general form, with the comma in question indicated here in angle brackets:
357:"Reception" and "impact" are not the same thing. For example, if they received a lot of publicity, so that a large percentage of the population knew about them, there might be a significant 245:
There are quite a few consecutive sentences in the 'Ideology' section which all start with 'He'. I'm not quite sure what to do about it, but it certainly makes the prose somewhat repetitive.
88: 83: 92: 75: 140: 717: 690: 659: 645: 616: 602: 584: 570: 522: 507: 487: 473: 454: 439: 415: 375: 352: 337: 273: 259: 222: 207: 186: 40: 79: 30: 17: 145: 71: 64: 575:
Hey, thanks for the spotcheck. I rephrased the information sourced to 1a, 1f, 1k, 5b, and 18 in light of your comments.
641: 552:
of this). All up, this article is a bit more negative towards the group's aims than the quotes make it out to be.
286:
This is an interesting and comprehensive article on a rather odd topic: nice work. I have some comments though:
201: 311:"In the newsletter, he asked readers not to procreate, to further human extinction." - second comma not needed 631: 324:'The paper admits that Knight's support for reduction of the human population' 'admits' is rather non-neutral 293:"that calls for the human race to abstain from reproduction" - surely they call for 'humans' to not reproduce 686: 655: 612: 580: 518: 483: 450: 348: 269: 218: 182: 503: 411: 371: 239: 545:
8a and 8d are fine (and the Fox News story is more reasonable than its hysterical headline implies!)
708: 196: 513:
Wow, only one. I'm getting a lot better. I changed the formatting a bit, hope it's better now.
682: 651: 608: 598: 576: 566: 514: 479: 469: 446: 435: 344: 333: 265: 214: 178: 164: 499: 407: 367: 168: 53: 314:
The lead says that Knight is 'a spokesman' but the article says that he's 'the spokesman'
535:
to something like 'just under 400' Please also note the above comment in relation to 1k.
464:
All my comments (including those below) are now addressed. Nice work with this article.
361:, eg everybody laughing at them and/or accusing them of being nutters, but virtually no 251:
These are all my quibbles; it's a pretty well written and sweet short article. Regards,
699: 561:
There were no problems at all with close paraphrasing in any of the above spot checks.
252: 264:
Thanks for your comments, points 2 and 3 were a bit tricky, but I had a go at them.
109: 594: 562: 465: 431: 329: 406:
from reproduction". With the comma, that incorrect binding doesn't happen.
607:
Huh, interesting, thanks. I've changed the licence on the picture's page.
395:"... calls for the human race to abstain from reproduction <comma: --> 296:" VHEMT argues that human extinction is preferable" - preferable to what? 118:
Featured article candidates/Voluntary Human Extinction Movement/archive1
125:
Featured article review/Voluntary Human Extinction Movement/archive1
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
498:- check formatting on FN 14, otherwise fine. Spotchecks not done. 630:
Very well-written article about an interesting subject. --
650:
Thanks, I'm glad you kept pushing me to nominate this :)
150: 105: 101: 97: 57: 308:"a VHEMT newsletter" - were there others at this time? 672:(Resolved comments by Crisco 1492 moved to talk page) 213:Thanks, you were a lot of help at the peer review. 194:: My comments were addressed at the PR. Good luck! 399:"... asked readers not to procreate <comma: --> 728:The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 681:-- Short and to the point; great for an article. 43:. No further edits should be made to this page. 290:The comma in the first sentence is unnecessary 734:No further edits should be made to this page. 29:The following is an archived discussion of a 8: 698:. Interesting and engaging, has my support. 129: 41:Knowledge talk:Featured article candidates 478:Thanks for all your detailed comments! 132: 122: 115: 317:What's an 'outreach' in this context? 18:Knowledge:Featured article candidates 7: 72:Voluntary Human Extinction Movement 65:Voluntary Human Extinction Movement 24: 1: 400:to further human extinction." 396:to cause ... extinction ..." 31:featured article nomination 751: 718:16:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC) 691:23:14, 8 March 2012 (UTC) 660:17:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 646:10:57, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 617:00:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC) 603:00:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC) 589:I should also note (as a 585:07:02, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 571:06:42, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 558:Reference 22 is also fine 523:05:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 508:04:39, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 488:17:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 474:07:07, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 455:06:10, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 440:06:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 416:13:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC) 376:10:41, 8 March 2012 (UTC) 353:04:25, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 338:03:11, 7 March 2012 (UTC) 274:16:13, 6 March 2012 (UTC) 260:11:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC) 223:17:52, 5 March 2012 (UTC) 208:05:14, 5 March 2012 (UTC) 187:01:27, 5 March 2012 (UTC) 731:Please do not modify it. 36:Please do not modify it. 555:Reference 19 checks out 548:13a and 13b check out 56:20:03, 10 March 2012 668:Crisco 1492 comments 542:6a and 6b check out 714: 705: 238:– ie. a dead end/ 172: 158: 157: 742: 733: 715: 710: 706: 701: 638: 635: 257: 206: 204: 161: 130: 113: 95: 48:The article was 38: 750: 749: 745: 744: 743: 741: 740: 739: 738: 729: 709: 700: 636: 633: 253: 202: 195: 86: 70: 68: 34: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 748: 746: 737: 736: 723: 721: 720: 693: 675: 674: 669: 665: 664: 663: 662: 625: 624: 623: 622: 621: 620: 619: 559: 556: 553: 549: 546: 543: 540: 536: 526: 525: 493: 492: 491: 490: 459: 458: 457: 421: 420: 419: 418: 403: 402: 401: 397: 390: 389: 383: 382: 381: 380: 379: 378: 325: 322: 318: 315: 312: 309: 306: 303: 300: 297: 294: 291: 279: 278: 277: 276: 249: 246: 243: 226: 225: 174: 173: 163:Nominator(s): 156: 155: 154: 153: 151:External links 148: 143: 135: 134: 128: 127: 121: 120: 67: 62: 61: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 747: 735: 732: 726: 725: 724: 719: 716: 713: 707: 704: 697: 694: 692: 688: 684: 680: 677: 676: 673: 670: 667: 666: 661: 657: 653: 649: 648: 647: 644: 643: 640: 639: 629: 626: 618: 614: 610: 606: 605: 604: 600: 596: 592: 588: 587: 586: 582: 578: 574: 573: 572: 568: 564: 560: 557: 554: 550: 547: 544: 541: 537: 533: 532: 531: 530: 524: 520: 516: 512: 511: 510: 509: 505: 501: 497: 496:Source review 489: 485: 481: 477: 476: 475: 471: 467: 463: 460: 456: 452: 448: 443: 442: 441: 437: 433: 428: 423: 422: 417: 413: 409: 404: 398: 394: 393: 392: 391: 387: 386: 385: 384: 377: 373: 369: 364: 360: 356: 355: 354: 350: 346: 341: 340: 339: 335: 331: 326: 323: 319: 316: 313: 310: 307: 304: 301: 298: 295: 292: 289: 288: 287: 285: 284: 275: 271: 267: 263: 262: 261: 258: 256: 250: 247: 244: 241: 237: 233: 232: 231: 230: 224: 220: 216: 212: 211: 210: 209: 205: 200: 199: 193: 189: 188: 184: 180: 171: 170: 166: 160: 159: 152: 149: 147: 144: 142: 139: 138: 137: 136: 131: 126: 123: 119: 116: 114: 111: 107: 103: 99: 94: 90: 85: 81: 77: 73: 66: 63: 60: 58: 55: 51: 44: 42: 37: 32: 27: 26: 19: 730: 727: 722: 711: 702: 695: 678: 671: 642: 632: 627: 591:image review 590: 528: 527: 495: 494: 461: 426: 362: 358: 282: 281: 280: 254: 235: 228: 227: 197: 191: 190: 175: 162: 146:Citation bot 69: 49: 47: 35: 28: 683:Crisco 1492 652:Mark Arsten 609:Mark Arsten 577:Mark Arsten 529:Spot checks 515:Mark Arsten 480:Mark Arsten 447:Mark Arsten 345:Mark Arsten 266:Mark Arsten 240:garden path 236:in this way 215:Mark Arsten 179:Mark Arsten 165:Mark Arsten 500:Nikkimaria 408:Mitch Ames 368:Mitch Ames 169:Mitch Ames 54:GrahamColm 637:Explosion 634:Supernova 359:reception 255:Eisfbnore 229:Comments' 283:Comments 141:Analysis 50:promoted 703:GRAPPLE 696:Support 679:Support 628:Support 462:Support 192:Support 133:Toolbox 89:protect 84:history 595:Nick-D 563:Nick-D 466:Nick-D 432:Nick-D 427:larger 363:impact 330:Nick-D 321:goal!) 167:& 93:delete 110:views 102:watch 98:links 16:< 687:talk 656:talk 613:talk 599:talk 581:talk 567:talk 519:talk 504:talk 484:talk 470:talk 451:talk 436:talk 412:talk 372:talk 349:talk 334:talk 270:talk 219:talk 183:talk 106:logs 80:talk 76:edit 203:Mar 198:Res 52:by 689:) 658:) 615:) 601:) 583:) 569:) 521:) 506:) 486:) 472:) 453:) 438:) 414:) 374:) 351:) 336:) 272:) 221:) 185:) 108:| 104:| 100:| 96:| 91:| 87:| 82:| 78:| 59:. 33:. 712:X 685:( 654:( 611:( 597:( 579:( 565:( 517:( 502:( 482:( 468:( 449:( 434:( 410:( 370:( 347:( 332:( 268:( 242:. 217:( 181:( 112:) 74:(

Index

Knowledge:Featured article candidates
featured article nomination
Knowledge talk:Featured article candidates
GrahamColm

Voluntary Human Extinction Movement
Voluntary Human Extinction Movement
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
Featured article candidates/Voluntary Human Extinction Movement/archive1
Featured article review/Voluntary Human Extinction Movement/archive1
Analysis
Citation bot
External links
Mark Arsten
Mitch Ames
Mark Arsten
talk
01:27, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Res
Mar
05:14, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Mark Arsten

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.