Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Environment

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]

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]

Help illustrate climate change information on Wikipedia and win a signed copy of The Climate Book by Greta Thunberg

Dear all

I’m very happy to let you know we are running a competition at Wikiproject Climate Change to encourage people to help improve visual information about Climate change. The competition is open until the 17th of May for all language versions of Wikipedia. The top three point scorers will each win a signed copy of The Climate Book by Greta Thunberg.

Please let me know if you have any questions

Thanks :)

John Cummings (talk) 16:29, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of environmentalists?

Please participate in the discussion at environmentalism about spinning off the section about people to a new list article called list of environmentalists (even though I don't think such a list of people will be particularly useful; but better than bloating up the article environmentalism). See talk page of environmentalism. Also see talk page of environmental movement - needs further brains as well. EMsmile (talk) 07:54, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EMsmile, just a kind reminder that Wikiproject notifications should be neutral, to prevent the impression of canvassing. Thanks! —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noted, thanks! EMsmile (talk) 10:17, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cancer Alley

I added some information regarding the racial and ethnic makeup of the parishes in Cancer Alley in Louisiana. It seems to be relevant to me as the article includes information about allegations of environmental racism. If anyone would want to chime in either for or against inclusion it would be appreciated. The collapsed table I would like to add is on the talk page. Cheers (see Talk:Cancer Alley#Adding the racial/ethnic profile of the counties in Cancer Alley...Patapsco913 (talk) 18:51, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion: New article on atmospheric methane uptake by trees

I'm Alexander Shenkin, co-author of a 2024 Nature paper showing trees remove methane from the atmosphere. Given the climate significance, this discovery might merit a Wikipedia article.

Key points:

  • Published in Nature (July 2024): https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07592-w
  • Shows forests are 10% more beneficial for climate than previously thought
  • Covered by multiple news outlets
  • Has commercial applications in development

Related: SelvaFlux (https://selvaflux.com), a company I founded to commercialize this discovery through methane removal credits, might also be notable enough for an article if it gains more coverage.

I have a conflict of interest so won't create these myself, but happy to provide sources and answer questions on this talk page if anyone's interested in writing about either topic. Ashenkin (talk) 05:36, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Add section to Golf on environmental impact.

The article for golf looks like it was essentially written by the golf industry. There are many articles on the environmental impact of the sport, and I linked several in talk:Golf, but we haven't had much forward movement. Posting the sources here and bringing attention to this in case anyone is interested in getting a section started. It's on my to do list, but may take a while.

GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 01:07, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the recommendations! I think what is likely a more tactful approach would be to incrementally improve sections: adding environmental issues to the golf course section, and talk about gender and racial discrimination in other places (i.e. instead of a section title "women" it could be something more like "Demographics of golf", Sadads (talk) 13:43, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Monsanto + Sign-post article

FYI. This recent Sign-post article

has produced discussion here:

--David Tornheim (talk) 17:44, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can people please improve the readability of Source–sink dynamics? Thanks.

I think that I'm normally pretty comfortable with technical writing, but IMHO the readability of Source–sink dynamics can be improved. - ~2025-36261-79 (talk) 04:47, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would like to bring attention to a new draft that may be relevant to WikiProject Environment:

Draft:Astronomitaly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Astronomitaly

The draft focuses on dark-sky preservation, light pollution awareness and environmental communication through astronomy-related outreach. The article includes multiple peer-reviewed academic sources.

Any comments or feedback would be welcome. FabriMarra68 (talk) 16:07, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for input: possible split discussion at Talk:REDD and REDD+

I've revived a discussion at Talk:REDD and REDD+#Split article into REDD+ and UN-REDD Programme about whether to re-split the UN-REDD Programme material out from REDD and REDD+ into a separate article (and leave a summary + {{main}} link in the parent article).

Input from interested editors is welcome. Please comment on the article talk page section linked above so the discussion stays in one place. Yourecoveredinbees (talk) 23:37, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Environment