Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Environment

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Environment and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

WikiProject Environment was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on April 2010.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by .

Requested move at Talk:Rewilding (conservation biology)#Requested move 4 March 2024

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]

RFC on Food and Health at Climate change

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]

FYI. The RfC can be found here:

Talk:Climate_change#RFC:_Food_and_health_section

--David Tornheim (talk) 19:49, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion around forestry and climate change mitigation

@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]

Merger discussion for Sustainable forest management, Afforestation, and Proforestation

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]

Requested move at Talk:Laboratoire des sciences du climat et de l'environnement#Requested move 27 May 2024

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 Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 01:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Climate change sceptics

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]

Zero carbon housing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

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]

Requested move at Talk:Ford Evos (concept car)#Requested move 17 June 2024

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 Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 10:11, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Nature

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]

Request for evaluation of Groen (political party)

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]

Request for "No net loss wetlands policy" to be renamed

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]

Requested move at Talk:Tonlé Sap#Requested move 10 July 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Tonlé Sap#Requested move 10 July 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Reading Beans 17:45, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tesla Model S at FAC

Hello contributors of the project, the article Tesla Model S, one of the most important electric vehicles of the 21st century, has been put up for FAC, if you would like to leave your comments, they'd be highly appreciated. Much thanks, 750 h+ 13:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FAR for Restoration of the Everglades

I have nominated Restoration of the Everglades for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm _Talk 00:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PROD of Hairshirt environmentalism

There is a proposed deletion of Hairshirt environmentalism. The notability has been questioned; for certain the page needs serious attention. If nobody works on it and/or opposes the PROD then it will be deleted on Sept 20, 2024. If it is of interest to this project then please edit; I am neutral on the topic beyond thinking that a PROD might be hasty. Ldm1954 (talk) 22:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Bees and toxic chemicals

Bees and toxic chemicals 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) 16:07, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to see this one retained a GA rating. Jusdafax (talk) 01:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty

Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty 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) 01:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since it was delisted, I’ve added this article to our task list. An important article, in my view. Jusdafax (talk) 08:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Food waste in the United Kingdom

Food waste in the United Kingdom 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) 22:02, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it has indeed been delisted because the sourcing was outdated, so here we have another good project for the WikiProject’s Article Tasks list, which also needs updating. Jusdafax (talk) 02:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Traditional ecological knowledge and traditional knowledge discussion at WP:FTN

There is a thread at the Fringe Theories Noticeboard about the articles traditional ecological knowledge and traditional knowledge that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Please consider joining the discussion. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 00:48, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at a couple screens worth of that discussion. I did find it of interest, so thanks for the heads up. I’m going to think over what I perused, then try to get through the rest. Cheers! Jusdafax (talk) 01:41, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment

Perhaps someone from this WikiProject could take a look at The Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment and assess it (particularly with respect to WP:NORG and WP:NOBLE). The article was created directly in the main space by a student participating in a WP:WEP affiliated university course; so, it never really underwent any type of formal assessment (e.g. WP:AFC) and it doesn't seem to have yet been reviewed by WP:NPP. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I just took a glance at it and it seems fine to me. It needs expansion, and hopefully someone here can get to that. I found the linked case interesting as well. Jusdafax (talk) 01:31, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for High-level radioactive waste management

High-level radioactive waste management 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) 22:52, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for env policy

I have started a merger discussion and have suggested to merge the article environmental politics into environmental policy. Please join the discussion at the talk page here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Environmental_politics#Merge . EMsmile (talk) 13:50, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental Engineer Article

Would it be alright if I were to replace the current article at Environmental Engineer (which is currently just a redirect to List of environmental engineers) with something along the lines of User:Froglegseternal/Environmental Engineer? Expanded, obviously, right now its just a stub, but something like that that talks more about the field itself than the knowledge bases the field relies on. The article used to be an actual article and was turned into that redirect, but that happened around 12 years ago, and not only have Wikipedia policies changed but also the field itself. Froglegseternal (talk) 07:23, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Environmental impact of aviation in the United Kingdom#Requested move 2 March 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Environmental impact of aviation in the United Kingdom#Requested move 2 March 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —Alalch E. 19:22, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Environmental impact of aviation in the United Kingdom

Environmental impact of aviation in the United Kingdom 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. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:52, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Use of ChatGPT/LLM in this WikiProject

Hello Wikipedians and editors,

I need your help! I am conducting research for my master's degree in environmental communication and I'm interested in the learning more about the use of LLMs during the editing/writing process of Wikipedia articles. In true Wikipedia fashion, I am entering this inquiry from a neutral standpoint - I neither support nor oppose the use of LLMs on Wikipedia articles. I am writing here in hopes of reading your anecdotes on how LLMs have been used or even encountered on Wikipedia articles within the WikiProject Environment.

You may see this topic a few times in your notifications, but please don't dismiss it as spam! I am posting the same topic here on the WikiProject Environment talk page, as well as the Earth, Climate Change and Tesla Model S talk pages - because they are the only three Wikipedia articles that are both of FA quality and of Top importance according to the WikiProject Environment Article Assessment table. I am open to hearing experiences with using or encountering LLMs in the editing process of other Wikipedia articles as well, but I do want to remain within the limits of articles under the WikiProject Environment umbrella.

It is understandable if you want to remain anonymous to other Wikipedians in this discussion. If so please feel free to reach out to me via the "Email this user" feature on my User page! Otherwise, I encourage a conversation to take place on this Talk page so that it may inspire others to contribute.

Finally, I am only in the design/digging around phase of this research. If anything that is said will be used in my actual research, all contributors will remain anonymous (unless requested otherwise). Consent forms can be made available at any time for anyone involved in further research that may be published to the public.

Some questions to inspire your storytelling:

- How have you encountered the use of LLMs on editing/writing Wikipedia articles within WikiProject environment?

- What impact has it had on article quality?

- Where do you stand on the use of LLMs in editing/writing Wikipedia articles dealing with environmental topics?

- What about the use of LLMs in editing/writing on other topics in Wikipedia articles?

- Do you have a community on Wikipedia that you communicate with about the use of LLMs in editing/writing Wikipedia articles? If so, please mention which one(s)!

All the best,

Wikipistemologist (talk) 14:40, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I use LLMs quite frequently in my editing. 95% of the time, I'm using it to simplify text, to help me find a word (either translated from Dutch, or by describing the word I'm trying to think of), or otherwise improving prose quality. On occasion, I've used it to suggest how an article could be structured (the table of content), but in general those suggestions are not great. We have a large problem with articles that are too difficult to understand, and I believe getting help on how to simplify the language we use makes it much easier for us to write in plain and clear English.

I've encountered people use LLMs for finding sources (at least that's my suspicion), where LLMs give hard-to-detect garbage. I consider this one of my main points of concern on Wikipedia, how it's difficult to stop this type of LLM-generated misattribution. The whole idea of Wikipedia is that we're not experts and that the sources speak for themselves. If that trust is broken, there is little role remaining for WIkipedia. I wish that legislators made correct attribution obligatory for these models, so that their users know how trustworthy their output is. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:24, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Femke! How great to get your input on this. Are you a part of/a watcher to any forums regarding any of these points? Have you seen discussions on Wikipedia about these concerns you have brought up in regards to any specific WikiProject Environment-related articles?

Additionally, have you ever tried using any tools to detect LLM generated text in any of the articles you're actively editing/watching? Wikipistemologist (talk) 16:30, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of fora where this is discussed: we sometimes talk about it in the Wikipedia WP:DISCORD server informally. On-wiki, you regularly see AI misuse reported at WP:ANI. In terms of an example, this edit to natural gas seems like AI slop to me. Sources that don't exist. The give-away was that a lot of text was added in one go. Normal edits, especially from newer editors, is usually more gradual.

I believe I used an LLM to make suggestions on how to improve the introduction to the induction cooker article.

I've never used LLM detectors. The two give-aways are made-up sources and waffle. Of course, some people waffle even without LLMs, so breaching the topic can be sensitive. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:41, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]