Talk:Dust Bowl

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dust Bowl article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Add new text under old text.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Start a new topic

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Agriculture Mid‑importance

	Agriculture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Manitoba / Saskatchewan / Alberta Mid‑importance

	Canada portal Canada notice board This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Manitoba.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Saskatchewan.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Alberta.

United States: Texas / History High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as High-importance).

Oklahoma Top‑importance

	Oklahoma portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oklahoma, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oklahoma on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OklahomaWikipedia:WikiProject OklahomaTemplate:WikiProject OklahomaOklahoma
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Weather: Droughts / Wildfires High‑importance

	Weather portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Wikipedia. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. Articles Requested Project Resources Become a Member Project Talk Assessment A-Class Alerts WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Droughts and wildfires task force (assessed as High-importance).

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Soil Top‑importance

	Earth sciences portal Dust Bowl is within the scope of WikiProject Soil, which collaborates on Soil and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.SoilWikipedia:WikiProject SoilTemplate:WikiProject SoilSoil
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Environment Mid‑importance

	Environment portal 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.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Policy High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

1

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 180 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by .

Migrant Outcomes Section

What is going on in this section? Numerous grammatical mistakes and errors. Fal2x (talk) 01:31, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A student editor added most of this for a Wiki Education-supported class at Hofstra. Same editor also made several suboptimal changes to existing text. Class is over, so I would just delete rather than try to salvage. diff.Dialectric (talk) 01:56, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

There's huge portions of this article that are hard/harder to read because of the grammar. Different tenses, words spelled incorrectly, incomplete sentences. Lyssy x (talk) 02:43, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious: 1. description of static electricity effects, 2. Oxygen depletion

Egan's book is cited for the assertion that static electricity can "short a car," meaning that the engine stalls because of damage to its ignition system. This claim is found on pages 7, 88, 195, 197, and 204. As examples of the automotive ignitions systems of that era, Ford's Model A (1927-1932) and Model B (1932-1934) used Kettering ignition systems. The Kettering system (or breaker point system) was introduced in 1912 and was the industry standard for over 70 years. This is a simple electromechanical system that is not affected by charge accumulation in the overall car. The far more likely cause is the direct effects of dust sucked into the engine intake system. The Model A had no air filter, while the Model B did.

Second, the article avers, "there wasn't enough oxygen within the storm to even keep a lamp going." Again, this doesn't square with science. Other than a minor dilution effect, choking dust doesn't change the composition of air.

Egan's book makes these and other sensational assertions. E.g.
1. "static was so strong it electrocuted a jackrabbit," p. 172. This is hyperbolic and implausible.

2. "The static had singed the foliage of the watermelon plants." p. 180.
3. "Gardens were burned and limp, electrocuted by static." p. 198.
For 2. and 3., a necessary condition for these dust storms was drought. Yet the simple and obvious explanation of lack of water is not considered. Instead, this author has valence for the more hair-raising tale.

4. A dust storm "producing enough static electricity to power New York." p. 221. Again, not possibly plausible.

Furthermore, newspaper accounts by Associated Press and United Press correspondents sent to the region for weeks to report on the dusters including Black Sunday fail to make any mention related to static electricity even though they experienced the dusters' full fury.

Egan's book contains no citations for these suspect statements. The facts of the Dust Bowl are impressive enough without such embellishment. Unless corroborated by a reliable source, this book should not be cited. Yankeepapa13 (talk) 20:01, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]