Talk:Traffic (conservation programme)

All Caps TRAFFIC edit

The name should be "Traffic", per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks). -- JHunterJ 22:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

It's fine to merge this page with the TRAFFIC International page. NOTE: the name TRAFFIC should be in captial letters as it originally started life as an acronym, but this is no longer used. [[Richard Thomas, Communications Co-ordinator, TRAFFIC International] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.82.96.166 (talk) 14:38, 20 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo TRAFFIC.jpg edit

 

Image:Logo TRAFFIC.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Promotional timeline section edit

This section has virtually no references and the only ones it does have are to their own website, a COIU editor is edit warring to retain it. the section needs re-writing in prose with suitable third party sources ALL claims/puffery MUST be referenced to WP:reliable sources Theroadislong (talk) 12:06, 7 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

This has now been referenced entirely to TRAFFIC's own website, Wikipedia is not interested in what TRAFFIC has to say about itself ONLY what has been reported in reliable WP:Secondary sources. Theroadislong (talk) 15:23, 7 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 23 November 2015 edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Consensus is against moving. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 01:40, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Reply



Traffic (conservation programme)TRAFFIC – The article uses "TRAFFIC" throughout and that title is just a redirect to the page. The disambiguation in the current title is therefore unneeded. – Deli nk (talk) 15:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Lonely Planet Vietnam Lonely Planet, ‎Iain Stewart, ‎Brett Atkinson - 2014 "Wildlife poaching has decimated forests of animals; snares capture and kill indiscriminately, whether animals are common or critically endangered. Figures are very difficult to ascertain, but a 2007 survey by wildlife trade monitoring organisation Traffic estimated that a million ... in 2013 the World Wildlife Fund and Traffic (the wildlife trade monitoring network) launched a campaign in Vietnam to counter its ."

  • Oppose "TRAFFIC" should redirect to traffic (disambiguation) -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:52, 25 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose per MOS:TM which clearly calls for the exact opposite of this proposal. And yes TRAFFIC should redir to Traffic (disambiguation). This is the same case as "TIME" (Time magazine) again; it is not an acronym, it's just a logo stylization, really obviously in this case – it's unmistakeable mimicry of military stencils which are conventionally all-caps (at least in the public imagination). This was certainly not a legit technical move request, since it directly reverses the applicable guideline on stylization of organization names.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  02:11, 28 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Advert? edit

I removed the advert tag and replaced it with a "citations for verification" tag. Recent edits seem to have taken care of the problem with promotional material, but the article still lacks independent, third-party published sources per Wikipedia:Verifiability. Coconutporkpie (talk) 01:58, 7 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Traffic (conservation programme). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 00:36, 14 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

The number of important looking red links edit

I have read through about a third of this articles page so far. It concerns me that there seem to be quite a few rather important looking red links that I believe should have pages. It makes me wonder why they are missing from Wikipedia? -- Ubh [talk... contribs...] 11:42, 11 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

Wiki Education assignment: Conservation Biology edit

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 1 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rhin0771 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Ungulate01.

— Assignment last updated by Otter246 (talk) 13:28, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply

A significant chunk of the organization's history is missing edit

The history section of this article begins in the 1990's, despite TRAFFIC having existed since 1976. That's a decade and a half of missing history. RedKnight7146 (talk) 17:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply