Talk:Destructive fishing practices

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Destructive fishing practices. 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/20081210112607/http://archive.greenpeace.org:80/comms/cbio/beam.html to http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/cbio/beam.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:49, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Scoring and suggested article improvements

This article has been chosen for monitoring and improvement by the Stockholm Environment Institute SDG 14 project (see here). We will be monitoring improvements to July 2022 using a scoring tool devised of both automated and expert evaluation. The score for the entire article on Feb 9, 2021 was 59/100. For the lead it was 17.2/100. ASRASR (talk) 14:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi ASRASR, could you please point out the main parameters of the evaluation exercise where this article lost points? This would then guide people on where to focus their energies on to make it better. EMsmile (talk) 04:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi EMsmile, advice to improve this article: The article lead is too short and the content needs to be more comprehensive covering the content of the article more completely. The article lacks relevant illustrations, needs more references and more incoming wikilinks (the articles referred to in the list of methods should each contain a link to this article). ASRASR (talk) 12:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC)