Talk:Conservation in Brazil

Brazil High‑importance

	Brazil portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics 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.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Protected areas High‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Protected areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected natural or ecological areas worldwide.Protected areasWikipedia:WikiProject Protected areasTemplate:WikiProject Protected areasProtected areas articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Environment High‑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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Revision Proposal

My name is Benito and as part of a course at Rice University I have been working at editing several Wikipedia articles relating to Brazil. Last semester I wrote extensively on Slavery in Brazil and am now hoping to contribute to Conservation in Brazil. As this article is currently rated as a "start class" I would like to bring up the quality to "good" and continue to add to the topic.

My first plan of action is to create a better flow of information. For example, the first paragraphs of the article are very general and should introduce the topic in a more urgent tone. I think that the information presented is really great, but needs to be reworked in the piece so that the greater overarching theme of conservation is understood. The topics 'Poaching,’ ‘Invasive Species,’ and ‘Economic benefits of environmental conservation,” barely reach a combined 200 word count and deserve greater representation within the article. The effects of recent conservation efforts have been made, and while they are represented and addressed, the topic of SNUC can be expanded with regards to Brazil's national parks.

I want to create a new topic for the benefits of environmental conservation. I will tie in the historical and environmental repercussions and better elaborate the necessity, be it economic or social, for conservation. The number of endangered species throughout the Amazon and affected rain forests have been catastrophic and are slowly being reversed.

My sources range from scholarly journals and policy briefs. My own ambition in contributing to this topic is that I visited the Amazon a couple years ago and found it vastly beautiful and would like conservation efforts to be acknowledged and continuously practiced. Please let me know if you have any hesitations with my proposed additions or any comments. I am very collaborative and believe that Wikipedia's mission is educate, so let's work together in getting the best information out there.

–Hello Benito, my name is Kramer and I am planning on updating this page with more current articles and will be focusing on adding a new section titled "Conservation Efforts and Achievements". Sub sections will focus on successful conservation efforts in Brazil and will specifically focus on the soy moratorium, the cattle moratorium and expanded indigenous reserves and other protected areas. I may also go through and insert some more current facts/ data to the overall article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kc1130 (talk • contribs) 02:28, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Benito103910. I'm sorry I didn't catch this post earlier, but I've just pared down the article considerably. I think there are a few things which worry me:

An article like this should be assiduously neutral. Readers expect (or at least hope) that a wikipedia article will not take a stand or position and that it won't editorialize. In this case a reader would be looking for a summary of the available information on conservation threats, efforts and history in brazil. If the article editorializes or takes a position in tone or fact, then we're not serving that audience as well as we could.
The article is titled "Conservation in Brazil", but the introduction doesn't give us much indication we're on the right page. Imagine if you knew very little about conservation in brazil but were eager to learn. We would want a brief summary of the contents, including the deforestation we mentioned heavily as well as agricultural factors but only in brief and in proportion to their importance to the subject.

Adapting to wikipedia's tone and style expectations are probably the hardest part about learning to write here. I certainly struggled with it for some time at first. Thinking in clear, declarative sentences which could be verified in a source worked best for me on topics where it is easy to take a stand for or against something. If you need any help or have questions with the above, please let me know. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:13, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on contribution

Hi Benito. Great job with your recent expansion of this article. You have added very comprehensive information over the rise of ethanol in Brazil and its effects on the environment. In order to sound a little more neutral, I would consider adding more information on both sides of the ethanol vs. gasoline question--or at least consider linking to another article that does the same. In general, your writing is clear and concise, but I would ask whether or not you want to split the rise of ethanol section into separate sections to increase readability. I look forward to reading your next contribution. CamilaKennedy (talk) 21:45, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on contribution

Hi Benito! This contribution is GREAT! Great job! I think it could be improved to stellar status with increased comprehensiveness and sourcing. There are some viewpoints (such as big oil’s take on the ethanol expansion) that would add interesting depth to the contribution. Additionally, the sub-subsection on soy production could be fuller in scope. Finally, the sourcing of the contribution could be improved. Currently, not all claims are cited, and few claims are attributed to more than one source. Increasing citations and demonstrating scholarly consensus would add greatly not only to the legitimacy of claims made but also to the NPOV of the article. Overall great work, I look forward to your final contribution! MCRU (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:27, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Conservation in Brazil

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Conservation in Brazil's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "RFAOutlook2012":

From Ethanol fuel: Renewable Fuels Association (6 March 2012). "Acelerating Industry Innovation – 2012 Ethanol Industry Outlook" (PDF). Renewable Fuels Association. Retrieved 18 March 2012. See pp. 3, 8, 10 22 and 23.
From Common ethanol fuel mixtures: Renewable Fuels Association (2012-03-06). "Acelerating Industry Innovation - 2012 Ethanol Industry Outlook" (PDF). Renewable Fuels Association. Retrieved 2012-05-06. See pp. 10

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:48, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Conservation in Brazil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110711124924/http://www.greenmomentum.com/wb3/wb/gm/gm_content?id_content=5055 to http://www.greenmomentum.com/wb3/wb/gm/gm_content?id_content=5055

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:02, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Rice University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2015 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]