Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

edit
 
Hi Avicennia marina! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 11:02, Sunday, March 1, 2015 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Evidence-based conservation has been accepted

edit
 
Evidence-based conservation, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 (talk) 21:31, 15 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations!

edit

I am so happy for you and that you got your article published in Wikipedia. Congratulations! Now you need to create an article about your professor, he seems pretty notable.

  Bfpage |leave a message  19:23, 20 March 2015 (UTC)Reply


Many thanks

edit

Let us create the article on Prof Sutherland right away! I will start it and you can help me in editing it.

Done

edit

Dear Barbarba, Can you please check this page which I just edited: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sutherland_(scientist) Many thanks!

edit

Please note that information about conservation should be included directly in the article, using links to reliable sources as references. The text and link you have added to articles, such as this one, are promotional (asking to visit another website) rather than the encyclopedic. These additions have been reverted. Mindmatrix 23:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Dear matrix, the reference is to an encyclopaedia on conservation interventions. Please check the website (non commercial and educational) before you reach a conclusion about it being promotional.

I didn't state the website was promotional. I said the text you posted on each Wikipedia article, such as the link I provided above, has a promotional tone that is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Anytime an editor writes something like "see [this site] for more information, it is promotional text. Mindmatrix 23:48, 17 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
hello @Avicenna_marina, I came here via Brant_goose and I agree that the Conservation information in AEWA is clearly relevant although it may not be complete in an encyclopaedic sense (cf various Brant sub-species exist, outside scope of AEWA) ... I think this could be resolved by -1- First modifying your numerous statements to something like "The Brant goose is one of the species included in the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds, which includes specific actions suggested for its conservation.[1]" and then (later, slowly) -2- species-by-species, adding a list of the suggested actions.
Do you agree that -1- would be acceptable, @Mindmatrix, with -2- later? If there is agreement, I will happily do the Brant_goose page ! -- jw (talk) 22:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
  1. ^ "Conservation Evidence". Conservation Evidence. Retrieved 17 March 2020.