| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Environment page. |
|
 | Environment Project‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
 | WikiProject Environment was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on April 2010. |
|
| ||||
|
||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Chevrolet Volt (first generation) has been nominated for a good article nomination. If you are interested in the discussion, feel free to review or comment on the article. Best, 750h+ (talk) 10:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Invasive species has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Hypoxia (environmental)#Requested move 10 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann(Talk) 02:17, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Rewilding (conservation biology)#Requested move 4 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is an RFC requesting that editors choose between one of two draft sections on Food and Health in the article on Climate change. Please take part in the RFC. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@EMsmile has started a discussion at WikiProject Climate Change called "How to clean up the mess around trees and mitigation?". As part of that discussion, it has been proposed to merge a few of the forestry articles. If you could contribute to the discussion on that talk page to help find clarity on the way forward and also mention you are from this project that would be great Chidgk1 (talk) 18:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Articles that you have been involved in editing—Sustainable forest management, Afforestation, and Proforestation—have been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Laboratoire des sciences du climat et de l'environnement#Requested move 27 May 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 01:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why don't we have a category for this? There are many sceptics out there particularly on the right side of politics. We have a category for COVID-19 conspiracy theorists and this would be similar. LibStar (talk) 20:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]Someone conflated Net zero home with Zero carbon housing, by rewriting the article in June 2024 and adding Net Zero. Now the article is a mess. Its intro paragraph contradicts the succeeding paragraph, and will confuse readers into thinking they are the same, when net zero is not about zero emissions at all, but offsets. That would fit more into line with the other article Low-energy house -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 22:54, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Ford Evos (concept car)#Requested move 17 June 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 10:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nature has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 20:11, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I hope it's okay to ask this here (I'm fairly new). I spent some time updating and improving this article Groen (political party) (Belgian Flemish green party). Checking the history, I noticed that several sections were written-removed-written-removed etc etc for having no neutral pov or no sources or... So I wanted to ask some input or evaluation of the page as it is now. I'm absolutely not claiming it is a very good article now, honestly it's just medium-good. But when I started it was such a mess and I put in some work so I hope people aren't going to delete it again. There are two tags: verification and update-needed, and I THINK both can be removed. (Except we just had elections, so actually it's going to be outdated very soon again. That was not so smart of me, but okay.) I hope that this can be the basis of a better article. Do you have any remarks or comments? Inktaap (talk) 17:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all! I have been looking at the no net loss wetlands policy page and would like to propose its renaming to "No net loss policy in the United States" and subsequent creation of an article that discusses no net loss worldwide. Since no net loss policy approaches have expanded beyond just the US where this idea originated and this issue has already been tagged, I think this would be a helpful improvement to address the lack of worldwide view taken by the article while still retaining the content since I think it is too big just for a section. I am planning on working on this in a sandbox if anyone is interested in collaborating or has any other suggestions? Manxshearwater (talk) 12:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
