Talk:Conservation biology

message: Shouldn't this page be merged with Conservation ecology?  There is no real difference between the two.  Guettarda 00:23, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose you're right - conservation biology is a broader category than conservation ecology.  I still think that a good case could be made for merging conservation ecology into this page, since both articles are so thin.  I suppose the better phrasing of this question would be: "Is there enough of a field of Conservation Ecology that is outside of the field of Conservation Biology that is should stand as a separate article".  My feeling is no, I would like to know what other people think Guettarda 01:51, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?

message: # The material I reverted was a copyvio (it was cited as such even in the insertion).
# I am not sure I like where this page is going - "conservation biology" is not synonymous with "environmental conservation".  Guettarda 29 June 2005 17:33 (UTC)
::I agree. The page deals very little with conservation biology.  The whole "Importance of Conservation" section doesn't belong here - perhaps it belongs in a broader page on conservation.  This whole article probably needs to be re-written to address the discipline of Conservation Biology.--Margareta 22:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Full agreement here. It should deal with things like SLOSS debates, metapopulation theory, genetic bottlenecks, invasives, succession etc.  Shyamal 02:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree.  There's a lot here on general conservation or maybe sustainability, but very little science. Is anyone working on overhauling this page?  If not, I may take a crack at it. Wingaling 02:37, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think anyone is.  It's awfully quiet in here.  Have at it!--Margareta 03:15, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: agree with some of the above comments. certainly the recitation of prizes is filler.  i think there is a place for "importance of CONSERVATION BIOLOGY" but not just importance of conservation.  this article is on my list of "to do" s but go ahead and start on it. lets go slowly and try to build a consensus.  i will try to contribute to the editing. cheers. Anlace 03:17, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits 

message: I have updated the "Expert" tag to associate this page with Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment.  The reasons for this have been more or less laid out in the discussions above. The "Expert" tag was originally added three months ago, but so far no experts have turned up to help us out.
Only the lead in this article actually has to do with Conservation Biology.  The entire "Importance of Conservation Biology" section is really about the importance of conservation, and as such probably doesn't belong in this article.  However, it is the only section that is consistently updated.  The "Conservation Threats" section could be made relevant if more context was given on how Conservation Biology attempts to address those threats, but as currently written it is also not very relevant to the topic.  Apart from the lead, there is no specific information about Conservation Biology per se.  At minimum, this page should have:
:A history of Conservation Biology
:Important figures in Conservation biology
:Short descriptions of the different disciplines involved in Conservation Biology, with wiki-links to full pages about them.
Information on important publications and organizations in Conservation Biology would also be helpful.--Margareta 17:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expert tags and WikiProject Environment 

message: .... and kindly contribute to these new articles when you get time, and request others too.
See Wildlife of India for reference.
Thanks
Atulsnischal 18:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Please create more "[[Wildlife of .....]]" articles for all countries

message: If you are interested in Environment, Wildlife, Conservation and Nature etc. please join in to contribute, even starting off with making new stub class articles will be a great contribution.
Sincerely
Atulsnischal 16:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We need senior administrators or people who are long in Wikipedia to help us with the templates and for other further helps. Details can be seen in its talk page. IT's urgent. We want this wkiproject to be added to the exsisting WP:IND banner. Amartyabag  TALK2ME 05:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Invitation for [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Protected areas of India]] & Conservation

message: Here is some text that I deleted that actually may have some relevance to Conservation Biology, but needs to get cleaned up, have citations added, and be placed in better context before being returned to the page:
:Current thinking favors the protection of entire ecological regions by the creation of “biosphere reserves.” Examples of such conservation areas include the Great Barrier Reef off Australia and Adirondack State Park in the United States. The importance of reconciling human use and conservation beyond the boundaries of parks has become another important issue.
::*Needs citations; does not belong in lead; could go in a section dealing with effects of habitat loss on biodiversity and the role of Conservation Biology in informing reserve design.  Biosphere reserves are not defined here.
:Fynbos example
:While it is difficult to establish the net value of a species, a financial value often can be estimated.
:In Cape Province, South Africa the native vegetation of the area is the fynbos, a type of shrub.  The fynbos are able to survive long periods of drought, periodic fires, and poor soil conditions; the plants are harvested annually with annual a yield of about $19 billion.  Recently exotic plants have threatened the endemic fynbos.  The new plants grow larger; increasing the severity of periodic fires.  More importantly they transpire more water; reducing the local streams to half their normal water flow.
:Removing the exotic species will cost between $140 US and $830 US per hectare and $8 US per hectare to maintain every year after.  Alternatively, a sewage purification plant would cost $135 million US to build and $2.6 million US per year to maintain.  Desalination of surrounding coastal waters would cost four times as much.
::*This may have a place, but it's relationship to conservation biology isn't demonstrated and it needs a source.  More likely it belongs in an article on ecological economics.
--Margareta 21:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some material that could go back with some modifications 

message: I know Anlace didn't agree with all the edits I made, but I sure am glad I got her attention, because she's done a lot to improve the article.
I'd like to suggest now that the "Importance of biological diversity" and "Threats to biological diversity" are good now, and are as long as they should be for an article whose focus is Conservation Biology.  While they both provide important cornerstones for discussing ConBio, neither should come to dominate the article.
What really needs work now is the "History Section," which also probably should not be more than 2-3 paragraphs long (and a lot of what is there about the history of conservation could be shortened to make room for information about the history of Conservation Biology).
Hopefully someone can add a section about the actual theory and practice of Conservation Biology.  Maybe start by expanding upon what is already in the lead (not expanding the lead itself, but using the lead as a guide for additional sections).  Specifically, this: "The term "conservation biology" refers to the application of science to the conservation of genes, populations, species, and ecosystems. Conservation biology is the scientific study of the phenomena that affect the maintenance, loss, and restoration of biological diversity."
There is basically no additional information in the article about this, although I think this should really be the meat and potatoes of the article.--Margareta 17:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good  Work!  And future steps? 

message: I have deleted the following sentence from the "Threats to Biological Diversity" section: "This figure is presumed additive to the 10 to 40 percent estimates of species loss, without global warming."
The use of the words "is presumed" (presumed by whom?) is a major red flag that this is POV.  And when I followed the reference to the article abstract, I found information to suggest that the statement was not true.  According to the abstract, the researchers estimated total species loss under different climate change scenarios; they did not separate out species loss from climate change from species loss due to other causes.
I cannot myself access the full article from home, so it's possible there is more to this than I can see.  If you have access to the full article and it backs up the "additive" statement, please share with the rest of us!--Margareta 17:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Species loss 

message: *"Presently the Earth is undergoing the Holocene Mass Extinction, an era of unprecedented species extinctions" - what, greater than the Permian extinction, where 95% of all species died? 
*The whole thing is somewhat weak and choppy, and needs copyediting.
*Evolutionary and Ecological Genetics, the course I took last term, will come in handy here. The key science is that in small populations, genetic drift dominates, and the effect of natural selection is weakened: disadvantageous mutations can gather and become fixed in the population, and temporarily neutral variations - even slightly advantageous ones - can easily be lost. In captive breeding programs, this can be helped with careful management and transfers between zoos, to increase the effective population size. Crashes also makke the founder effect come into play, long after they recover. The population can be rescued by gene flow from other populations. Adam Cuerden talk 21:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Re: Holocene mass extinction.  I read an article about this recently; I wish I could remember where.  They were comparing current extinction rates to the Permian, and saying that even though a greater percent of species went extinct then, a greater number are going extinct now, simply because there are so many more species now.  So "unprecedented" is relative in this sense.  Perhaps whoever added the source (was it Anlace?) could verify it and see exactly what it says about the "unprecedented" nature of the current extinction.  If it is in number, the sentence could read "an era of species extinctions unprecedented in number" or simply omit "era" and say "an unprecedented number of species extinctions."--Margareta 21:42, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thoughts 

message: Thanks to Margaretafor the invitation to help with this article. I'm currently super busy, but a brief glance at the article suggested to me that one uncontroversial area that the article could be dramatically improved is an examination of the various fields that comprise conservation biology - conservation genetics, habitat management, reserve design, endangered species management, environemental economics, legal aspects, population ecology etc. Basically, it needs to deal with some of the science and how particular branches of other disciplines (such as population biology) affect conservation biology.  
I have to many real world commitments over the next three weeks (I'm just begining a PhD in a realetd field) but I'd ba happy to contribute after that. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 22:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invitation to contribute 

message: I read through most of the suggestions in here and took it upon myself to update sections of this page. I didn't read well and it was lacking reference material. I did my undergraduate in wildlife biology, my masters degree at the University of Calgary in Zoology and run a non-profit conservation society. I hope that my edits will help. I will return and tinker on this page to help it capture the notion of conservation biology. It is missing a lot of history. Please let me know if my edits are appreciated!! I think the goal here is to make certain that this become a great page - because the issue is so important. The journal 'Conservation Biology' - has in its 'Aims and Scope' "...the study and preservation of species and habitats." This is perhaps a good start toward understanding what this science is all about.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thompsma (talk • contribs) 09:38, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good! I have much less experience in the field, but I'll copy-edit when you're done.Mailseth (talk) 14:16, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, I was thinking it would be good to add more images to the article. Thoughts on that? You could leave place holders with a description of the image you think would be appropriate, and I could fill or delete each as photos are available in the commons. Or I could just add images I think are appropriate and you can feel free to delete if you don't think it adds anything.Mailseth (talk) 14:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Revisions and update 

message: Hi everyone - as you can see I have put a significant effort forward on getting this page up to speed. I just learned how to put up an article to be peer-reviewed and would like to do the same for this page. There are still a lot of edits that need to be done and I was hoping for some assistance and feedback in this regard. As for Mailseth's comment that this might be too long - I don't think so. I've checked out other sites, such as Evolution - which have been featured articles and they are much longer than this page. Conservation Biology is a huge topic. I decided, however, not to discuss Evolution or Conservation genetics - because these have their own articles started, albeit Conservation Genetics is as rough as this one was when I arrived here. I might move onto Conservation Genetics - since this is where my real area of expertise rests. Thompsma (talk) 09:28, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Preparing for article review

message: Great job Mailseth!! Thanks for helping to whip this into shape. I'm learning lots as I review your edits to see how things are done. Teamwork! I will be moving onto the Conservation genetics article this week - it is in desperate need of repair. If you feel like tagging along - please do.  Thompsma (talk) 23:31, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: More advice: You've been using embedded links, but they haven't been formatted correctly for citations. You might want to take a look at the short article Wikipedia:Embedded citations. Also, I've noticed that you put punctuation after inline citations. That's not the normal way of doing it. Hope this helps, Mailseth (talk) 18:02, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editorial 

message: I took the second lead paragraph of the article, which included a summary of the historical information, and incorporated it into the history section. I hope to work on the history section and bring some of this into the preamble at a later date. The paragraph didn't fit with the flow of the current article format. Thompsma (talk) 09:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello! As a part of my biology class I am hoping to make edits to the history of the conservation movement section of this page. So far I have seen a source that is not properly cited, a source that leads to nowhere, and a source backed in a website. I hope to bring the perspective of this history section back to a more neutral standpoint by adding more international perspectives in hopes of taking the focus away from just the U.S. and European Countries.--Melmacd94 (talk) 00:50, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modified History out of second paragraph 

message: I've gathered references and have started reading about the history of conservation biology in greater detail. I will be updating this section and thought it might be more appropriate to split the article by moving the history section to its own article. Thoughts? Debate? Thompsma (talk) 18:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion - Moving History to separate article 

message: The image :File:Sierra Club.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
*:      File:WWF logo.svg
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:25, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:Sierra Club.png

message: Should there also be a "Methods section"? For example, what do Conservation Biologists do all day (besides grant writing)? The Biodiversity#Management article has a section on conservation with info like that. Mailseth (talk) 03:45, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Methods section 

message: I updated the lead section following some of the guidelines from Wikipedia:Lead section. Just need to go back and put in some strategic references. I read somewhere that the lead doesn't need citations - but found out that this is incorrect. I'll repair this. Thompsma (talk) 17:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead Section

message: I've been working away at the history section - please note that this section needs organization and does not read well at this point in time. If you have contributions - please feel free to help out. I'm doing some more research and organization before I post the final revisions.Thompsma (talk) 21:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: History Section

message: Thanks for the new image in the history section Mailseth!! It is a great image and really captures the history. Theodore Roosevelt was such an interesting person. This adds greatly to the context. Will have time to contribute after a little break from wiki.Thompsma (talk) 03:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Beautiful image

message: Can biodiversity animal databases be mentioned as a tool to conserve the biodiversity ? For axample the freshwater animal diversity assessment (http://fada.biodiversity.be/) is a database to help conserve fresh water animals.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.169.78 (talk) 11:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biodiversity animal databases 

message: There are probably many ways in which scientists and medicine can help endangered species. One way that could possibly help is artificial insemination. It is known that larger animals have been artifically inseminated, especially on farms where a farmer choses what kind of offspring they would like and chose a sperm donor to inseminate a female with. What if today's animals had sperm collected and froze so that it can be used in the future. That may help in reducing the amount of animals that have the chance of becoming inbred. Medford.6 (talk) 16:22, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scientifically Preserving Endangered Species 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Conservation biology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090205110648/http://www4.ncsu.edu/~rrdunn/InsectExtinctionPDF.pdf to http://www4.ncsu.edu/~rrdunn/InsectExtinctionPDF.pdf
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.nau.edu/~envsci/sisk/courses/env440/readings/Kareiva+et+al+2003+Am+Sci.pdf
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.nau.edu/~envsci/sisk/courses/env440/readings/Kareiva+et+al+2003+Am+Sci.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:36, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I would suggest that conservation traditions can be explained a little bit more. Can you explain the traditions like Buddhist and Islamic (etc.)in a little more detail.
WMcDo111 (talk) 02:54, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conservation ethics - examples of tradition 

message: Hello I am Pradeep Yadav....and I am trying to create a page about me...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.14.151.199 (talk) 09:54, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pradeep Yadav 

message: The section Threats of Biodiversity needs some updating:
•Some of the sources used in this section are dated back to the 1981, and the most recent one in this section referenced was from 2009. There is nothing from recent years, when there have been many changes to the climate, and many natural disasters that could possibly be linked to threats of biodiversity and to global warming. 
•With updating the references and information to more relevant information today, one might find more examples that could be used for climate change, extinction of species, carbon dioxide changes, and global warming. In particular the information connected to Yellowstone National Park. The source connected to Yellowstone is dated from 2009. An update is important because just recently this year Yellowstone faced a potential threat to biodiversity when a parasite killed thousands of fish in Yellowstone River, this river runs through Yellowstone National Park. Other important information that could be added to expand the concept of threats to biodiversity could be to discuss the most recent temperature changes accross the US, in regards to lack of rain, and the impact the recent storms, and draughts have had on our environment. Tbmcintosh (talk) 18:05, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  5.5 Threats to Biodiversity Changes 

message: Good morning. The content in the History of the Early Naturalist is non biased and is no sources used are biased toward one specific early finding. I find this extremely helpful to discern factual information. I think where this section could be improved is adding more information about more of the early naturalist. Charles Darwin is arguably the most important naturalist and was the first to discover evolution by Natural selection. However, I think that some of his mentors should also be mentioned in this section and some of his predecessors. I think it would be extremely important to show where Darwin got his initial ideas of evolution from since evolution was not widely accepted during his time. For example: Cuvier's work with fossils and Lamarck's thought that all species had developed from one simple ancestor (Edinburgh Lamarckians: Robert Jameson and Robert E. Grant. (1991). Journal of the History of Biology, 24(1), 1-18. doi:10.1007/bf00130472) Most people still believed in special creation. I believe that it is also important to show how he later influenced the thinking of other naturalist during his time in to possibly changing their opinions. This section of the article has great initial thoughts and ground work. I just believe that it could have a lot more detail added to it. 
Mmericle27 (talk) 12:37, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earlier Naturalist  

message: Overall the subsection was okay. For me, there could have been more citations, it was seemingly just telling a story, however there was no way to go ahead and fact check a few things. The article was written to coincide with its topic "global conservations efforts," although it did tell more of the history than anything. The authors did well on remaining neutral and not writing from a perspective that would be one sided. For me the piece of writing will be more interesting and focused if it were to mention what other countries outside of the US have done, or what they are doing in support of conservation ecology. Darby509 (talk) 17:16, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Global Conservation Efforts 

message: In my opinion, the section in general was mediocre. It did not appear biased, not confusing. Although, I did feel as if it lacked a bit of depth though and could have used a few more citations and/ or sources. As for the information presented, the original author could certainly add more detail on the groups alone, as it seems to be skipped through a bit. Furthermore, a small content gap appears in the second paragraph: insects are jumped into, specifically honey bees. A more thorough introduction would have been nice. Overall, not bad! Leeza.decheubel (talk) 21:20, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Groups Other than Vertebrates' Section 

message: Going through the referenced material I found most of the information and sources would lead to a book or an ISBN. Nothing concrete that I could read about, this was for most of the reference sources, but the ones that linked out would link to wiki pages with information relating to what they have linked as. The first paragraph was confusing for me, it had topics that would relate with measuring extinction rate, but not concrete enough to understand and verify. Also, the author used the phrase "the most" when talking about what contribution of a particular book. This would lead me to believe that the article isn't really neutral. Plus, the two-paragraph didn't contribute to the topic. The author talked about limiting factors that scientist had in not documenting all the living species on earth. When it came to the citations, some worked but would lead you to wiki pages, or a web page that was down, and links that wouldn't work (links for 56, 57, and 62). Finally, I copied a few of the sentences to the search bar and found that it was plagiarized about 70-90% worth. 
My two question would be
1) What are some of the tools for measuring the extinct rate and could fossil location alter the information to documenting this?
2) With advances in technology will we ever acquire information on all species?
 --21:58, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critique - Measuring Extinct Rate  

message: Overall this section on approaches to conservation is unbiased and is well cited for how short it is; however it could be expanded on with more detail as well as more information in general. It specifies what in-situ focuses its efforts on however does not specify what ex-situ efforts focus on. Additionally since these forms of conservation are the basic subdivisions of conservation approaches, examples could be provided in order to paint a full picture and establish a deeper understanding on par with the detail of the other sections. Examples of conservation approaches in-situ and ex-situ would also clear up the discrepancy brought up by the next paragraph regarding the difference between conservationists and preservationists. It claims that preservationists protect ecosystems by blocking interference while conservationists engage societies and ecosystems. The definition provided for conservationist approaches does not clarify this aspect of conservation. Overall this section lacks a developed narrative and leaves readers unfulfilled on the topic of approaches to conservation biology. Vmkeam (talk) 22:21, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critiquing an article - "Approaches" section  

message: Overall I think this section of the article was very well developed. The information discussed in the article is quite relevant to the topic of conservation biology.The composition was amazingly thorough while the transitions from one subtopic to another were smooth.I feel as if the article provided both  useful and relevant  information about the status of oceans ad reefs.There was no strong voicing of opinion, simply a presentation of well referenced facts, which resulted in an informative, neutral article. Yamarie22 (talk) 22:23, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of Oceans and Reefs 

message: Action for conservation has been around for a long time now from individuals, governments and non profit organization advocating for this course. These resource are at risk as we talk and the references provided in the article about conservation are reliable, however short of some important reference which can not be left out when we talk about conservation in these days "International Union for Conservation of Nature".International Union for Conservation of Nature. The topic has been well discuss and presented in a way to give information firstly about the topic. In discussing the aspect of personal interest on conservation it was not clear as to who does it, how it arise, and any past situation of such occurrence. From a general view the information sounds totally unbiased and while checking the references the information are also true in its presentation specifically in talking about how the subject has evolve to today and affect us. The sources of this piece are from book writers, journals, organization, religious bodies. This bodies presented their material according to their views the article just did not infer with their opinion. The point of view of personal interest in conservation is under-presented since it should be part of the history on how evolution of conservation is taking place. Some of the links do not work especially link 7 and 22. --Idrissou9cm (talk) 23:30, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Natural resource conservation 

message: This section of the article focuses on the significance of  conservation biology by defining its purpose, which is to investigate the hypothesis ( and /or prevent )concerning the extinction of half the species in the universe within the future. Conservation biology  is a " mission oriented crisis discipline"(The nature of education) .Conserving something biological or ecological is its main concern .It targets the decline of biological diversity. Biodiversity is significant because it provides goods and services for humans and the ecosystem. It maintains interactions between the living and non living part of the environment. For example biodiversity has provided plants for crops that feed a multitudinous amount of people, while also decomposing  organisms that release nutrients into soil and water(Sylvia S. Mader|Michael W. BIOLOGY).
The loss of biodiversity can impact negatively.  Destruction of ecosystems results in excessive rates of extinction . This field contains drawings on sciences, economics, and the practice of managing natural resources . This helps to fully justify the concerns of conservation biologists in their struggle to preserve biodiversity. Scientists are working towards a global framework with nationwide alliances to form a master plan to counter the loss.
* Everything in this section of the article is relative to conservation biology, It wasn't hard to grasp the concept.
* Clicking on the links in this section do work, It helps you connect everything being said to form a better understand .
*</ref>
*
Dowusu6654 (talk) 04:22, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conservation Biology Critique " description" 

message: I checked on the article Ethics and Values for citation but I found out that the first citation number 69 by Chan has two citations. The very first part to it says article not found the second web page opened. While the number 24 also opened up the web page.
The information seems outdated most dated publishing that I came across there were in the 1800 and 1900s, the most resent date I saw was 2008. My though was I will be seeing more ethical dilemma for example; organisms right etc.
Ettahtaje (talk) 23:21, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethics and Values 

message: The "Conversation Priorities" section of the Conservation Biology wiki is an excellent example of objective POV. It discusses the different areas of focus for conservation and the benefits and limiting factors of each. It introduces the idea that rare, endangered species should not be the only concern and then discusses the concepts for prioritizing "hotspots" vs "coldspots." It includes links to different organizations and their priorities and discusses the reasoning behind their primary concerns. That being said, there are several areas that can be improved upon.
One area of concern is the linked articles. For example, link [75] to the CREO's Why Care About Species That Have Gone Extinct? seems to be informal. Although it is from a reputable source (American Museum of Natural History), the linked article is more of a personal commentary than a research article. Furthermore, the site has spelling errors and has not been updated in many years. That being said, some linking is done well: the direct link to IUCN's Red List is a great relevant, and professional, resource.
Additionally, and in my opinion more importantly, this "Conservation Priorities" only focuses on one aspect: what should be prioritized. Adding more information regarding how it is prioritized and which acts are being done is highly relevant to the article. In later sections, specific activities are discussed; but when discussing the priorities of conservation, it is important to focus not only on what should be prioritized but how it is being done. What role does money play in conservation? How do these organizations focus their hotspot or coldspot conservation efforts? By addressing these concerns, this section can elevate it's relevance and informational quality.
Mcolgan01 (talk) 21:22, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critique Sect 4.7 Conservation Priorities 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Conservation biology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719175825/http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/edu/dees/V1003/lectures/population/Tragedy%20of%20the%20Commons.pdf to http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/edu/dees/V1003/lectures/population/Tragedy%20of%20the%20Commons.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://evolution.binghamton.edu/dswilson/resources/publications_resources/Rethinking
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060630000000/http://www.iucnredlist.org/info/tables/table1 to http://www.iucnredlist.org/info/tables/table1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140627000000/http://www.iucnredlist.org to http://www.iucnredlist.org
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091226124242/http://www.uvm.edu/giee/publications/Nature_Paper.pdf to http://www.uvm.edu/giee/publications/Nature_Paper.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090706005010/http://www.iucnredlist.org/amphibians to http://www.iucnredlist.org/amphibians
*Added  tag to https://www.herpconbio.org/~herpconb/McCallum/amphibian%20extinctions.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:28, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Conservation biology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120313144333/http://www.asiaticsociety.org.bd/journals/Golden_jubilee_vol/articles/H_468%20%28Brett%20M%20Benet%29.htm to http://www.asiaticsociety.org.bd/journals/Golden_jubilee_vol/articles/H_468%20%28Brett%20M%20Benet%29.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.iucnredlist.org/
*Added  tag to http://www.environmental-expert.com/Files%5C8392%5Carticles%5C9961%5CTheSumIsGreaterthantheParts.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:58, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 12 external links on Conservation biology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090225013400/http://www.ser.org/iprn/pdf/Elaine_Abraham.pdf to http://www.ser.org/iprn/pdf/Elaine_Abraham.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070227072411/http://www.biodiv.org/convention/default.shtml to http://www.biodiv.org/convention/default.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090225013400/http://www.ecology.uq.edu.au/docs/SoC_Brazil_2005/Papers/Margules_and_Pressey_2000.pdf to http://www.ecology.uq.edu.au/docs/SoC_Brazil_2005/Papers/Margules_and_Pressey_2000.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071116135224/http://web.conservation.org/xp/gcf to http://web.conservation.org/xp/gcf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081222043456/http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/Pages/default.aspx to http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/Pages/default.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081130114053/http://earthtrends.wri.org/pdf_library/feature/eco_fea_value.pdf to http://earthtrends.wri.org/pdf_library/feature/eco_fea_value.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070505071048/http://ecotrust.org/press/katoomba_backgrounder.html to http://www.ecotrust.org/press/katoomba_backgrounder.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070407114751/http://essp.csumb.edu/esse/ to http://essp.csumb.edu/esse/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070202162316/http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis92/apnov92.htm to http://apis.ifas.ufl.edu/apis92/apnov92.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719234229/http://www.waikatoregion.govt.nz/environmental-information/About-the-Waikato-region/Our-economy/The-hidden-economy/ to http://www.waikatoregion.govt.nz/environmental-information/About-the-Waikato-region/Our-economy/The-hidden-economy/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927164904/http://www.bioversityinternational.org/training/training_materials/gis_manual.html to http://www.bioversityinternational.org/training/training_materials/gis_manual.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060909070826/http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv1-59 to http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv1-59
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:49, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Perhaps this can be mentioned:
A Global Deal For Nature: Guiding principles, milestones, and targets
Genetics4good (talk) 08:26, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Global Deal for Nature

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Conservation (ethic) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 20:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Note in consvertio biodiversity 2409:4042:2EA1:B646:83CF:7046:4368:E11F (talk) 07:04, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biology 

message: A) All references appear to be reliable as they are referenced to a lot of scientific journals and big international organizations that specialize on the topic of conservation biology. There were many examples from different studies of different scientists. A lot of pictures and graphs with relevant captions. 
B) The article seems to be very well relevant and on topic throughout. There were no distracting side comments or any unnecessary details. It was easy to find information that was needed and the headers were all concise.
C) There were no biases detected in the article. The author(s) remained neutral throughout and provided viable information.
Esysebe0321 (talk) 18:26, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critiques 

message: — Assignment last updated by Hbrowny5 (talk) 03:08, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Comparative Developmental Biology

message: — Assignment last updated by Warmedforbs (talk) 01:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Applied Plant Ecology Winter 2024