Talk:Creeping normality
This article was nominated for deletion on 2005 May 29. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit]This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 March 2019 and 10 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tmendo26. Peer reviewers: Rmcnamara2.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit]This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 January 2020 and 9 March 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Missmj180.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit]This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jakes27s.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Source material for Jared Diamond citation
[edit]Here is the source material for the heretofore-nonspecific reference to Jared Diamond's writings as a source for the "creeping normality" concept. The following paragraph is quoted from p. 425 of the original hardcover edition of Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed (published by Penguin Group, New York, 2005; ISBN 0-670-03337-5):
Politicians use the term "creeping normalcy" to refer to […] slow trends concealed within noisy fluctuations. If the economy, schools, traffic congestion, or anything else is deteriorating only slowly, it's difficult to recognize that each successive year is on the average slightly worse than the year before, so one's baseline standard for what constitutes "normalcy" shifts gradually and imperceptibly. It may take a few decades of a long sequence of such slight year-to-year changes before people realize, with a jolt, that conditions used to be much better several decades ago, and that what is accepted as normalcy has crept downwards.
— Jaydiem (talk) 01:10, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Proposed changes
[edit]I am working on adding more to this page. The idea was introduced through environmental degradation, that could be developed further. It is also referred to as Death by a Thousand Cuts, and that needs development. Also, other sources have used that term to include maternal obesity, as well as government interference. I hope to bolster the sites credibility by adding additional sources, introducing new research, and linking Jared Diamond's page to this one.
Proposed bibliography of sources:
Antheaume, N., & Barbelivien, D. Why do family businesses die? An investigation through the work of an ethnologist and geographer on the collapse of human societies.
Ariel, T. (2017). The Challenges Of Governance In A Complex World. World Scientific.
Armstrong, D. P., Hayward, M. W., Moro, D., & Seddon, P. J. (2015). Reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna: progress, emerging themes, and future directions. In Advances in reintroduction biology of Australian and New Zealand fauna (pp 285-289). Clayton South, VIC: CSIRO Publishing.
Boston, J. (2017). Failing the future - Why governments short-change long-term interests. In Safeguarding the Future: Governing in an Uncertain World (pp. 13-31) (Vol. 52). Bridget Williams Books.
Chon, K. H. (2016). Cybercrime precursors: Towards a model of offender resources. PhD dissertation, Australian National University.
Ho, P. (2018). Lecture 1: Hunting black swans and taming black elephants: Governance in a complex world. In The challenges of governance in a complex world (pp. 1-35). Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Pte.
Schmied, V. A., Duff, M., Dahlen, H. G., Mills, A. E., & Kolt, G. S. (2011). ‘Not waving but drowning’: A study of the experiences and concerns of midwives and other health professionals caring for obese childbearing women. Midwifery, 27(4), 424-430. doi:10.1016/j.midw.2010.02.010
Wilkinson, S. A., Poad, D., & Stapleton, H. (2013). Maternal overweight and obesity: A survey of clinicians' characteristics and attitudes, and their responses to their pregnant clients. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 13, 117. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-13-117
Wouter, V. J. (Ed.). (2018). Disrupted Balance-Society At Risk(Vol. 6). World Scientific.
Jakes27s (talk) 19:28, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
Tmendo26 (talk) 05:48, 15 April 2019 (UTC)ADDED A REFERENCE SECTION, TMENDO26, 14 APR 19 I'll be working on summarizing the use of "creeping normalicy" and "landscape amnesia" from these articles onto the page:
Levêque, J., Marzano, M., Broome, A., Connolly, T., & Dandy, N. (2015). Forest visitor perceptions of recreational impacts on amphibian wildlife. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 61(4), 505-515.
Mass shootings have started to look, sound and feel the same — and that’s a problem. (2018). Gulf News, p. Gulf News, Feb 18, 2018.
Moskal, P., Dziuban, C., Upchurch, R., Hartman, J., & Truman, B. (2006). Assessing Online Learning: What One University Learned about Student Success, Persistence, and Satisfaction. Peer Review, 8(4), 26-29.
De Waal, A. (2006). TOWARDS A COMPARATIVE POLITICAL ETHNOGRAPHY OF DISASTER PREVENTION. Journal of International Affairs, 59(2), 129-XIV.
Wilkinson, S. A., Poad, D., & Stapleton, H. (2013). Maternal overweight and obesity: A survey of clinicians' characteristics and attitudes, and their responses to their pregnant clients. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 13, 117. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy.foley.gonzaga.edu/10.1186/1471-2393-13-117
This should help round out the coverage of the term in a few places! Tmendo26 (talk) 12:43, 6 April 2019 (UTC)TMendoza
Added two subsections, one on mass shootings and one on landscape amnesia with the Gulf News and Levenque citations. Tmendo26 (talk) 06:19, 29 April 2019 (UTC)TMendo26, 27 April 2019
I made significant changes to the article in added two sub-sections (gun violence and lanscape amnesia) as well as editing the entire article for tone and clarifying content by adding more info (especially under maternal overweight/obesity section). I am finished making changes. Tmendo26 (talk) 12:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)TMendo26 10 May 19
Lisa's Peer Review
[edit]Lisa, I think you did a great job of developing the death by a thousand cuts portion of this article. It is helpful to have more context around that. Out of curiosity did you look at any other books on this subject? There is a book on this subject by George Blue and Timothy Brook. It might be useful to leverage their take on it as well.
I'm a little concerned on the balance portion of the article. It could just be that there isn't much information for the other uses. Great job on providing more sources to this article! Looking forward to seeing the final version. Kehinton1 (talk) 23:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)Kehinton1
Thanks for the help Keri! I did look at a bunch of sources, but eventually just ran out of time to cite them all. I also wanted to keep the focus pretty narrow and well-defined. There is a lot of similar info available for the obesity issue, but nothing that sheds new light. The other uses were confined to one or two sources at best. Jakes27s (talk) 00:57, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
"Covid-19 Pandemic" section is unsourced and lacks NPOV
[edit]As above, the section on the Covid-19 has no references or sources, and the tone doesn't seem very encyclopedic.
The difference between it and the other sections is telling: they all have at least one reference and further hyperlinks.
Frankly, I'd rather be bold and scrub the section entirely unless it was rewritten with a much better, properly sourced and referenced, neutral point of view (if this has been argued for and against by people, it's worth noting as an albeit controversial example).
However, as it's important to get consensus... What do y'all think?
Re-reference/re-source the section, re-do the section so it's up to Wikipedia standards, or remove it entirely (perhaps just for now until a more relevant version can be made)?
2A02:8109:8300:C50:59E8:FC79:57C2:A207 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:29, 20 December 2021 (UTC)