Talk:Lemur Conservation Foundation

Discussion moved from User talk:Simponafotsy
In reply to "Hi JBH, I have added several independent sources, see citations #9 and #11. Is this now sufficient to remove some of the warnings at the top of the page?" — Preceding text originally posted&#32;on User talk:Simponafotsy&#32;([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Simponafotsy&diff=prev&oldid=828815953 diff])&#32;by Simponafotsy (talk&sdot;contribs)&#32;22:51, 4 March 2018 (UTC)


 * My personal rule of thumb, and it is just that since other editors will certainly have other opinions, is that most (closer to 75% than 50% ) of the non-trivial statements should be derived from independent, third party reliable sources. So, for instance of these claims: The significance of the training programs; Collaboration with/support of the wildlife refuges (5 claims – Tampolo, EnviroKidz Giving Back, support Anjanaharibe-Sud Special Reserve, support Marojejy National Park, and community based conservation programs) ; Implicit assertions that the associated centers (Toomey Lemur Pavilion, Marilyn K. North Lemur Lodge, The Mianatra Center for Lemur Studies and the Anne &amp; Walter Bladstrom Library) are significant in some way that makes them worth mentioning; That the association with the colleges and universities are significant and the association with Tattersall — most should be supported by something in a third party source. Support can vary from brief mention to a couple of sentences. What is important is demonstrating that the point is significant enough to be mentioned by a third party. In the case of interviews things are a bit tricky. Someone from the organization bringing up or 'plugging' the topic is not something I would consider third party interest but an interview which focuses significantly on the topic would. Whether there is enough third party vs self derived information is hard to assess because the citations are just tacked on in groups at the end of sections. I would recommend placing the citations following the text/statement which it is being used to support — just as you would footnote an idea originated by a colleague in a paper. Also, please remember, I am just an editor here like you are. I spend my volunteer time reviewing new articles and sometimes working with new editors so I have developed an understanding of the policies and guidelines here along with my ideas of what makes an article good but other editors have their own views. In fact, it is perfectly OK for you to remove the maintenance tags yourself if, after reading the links on the tags, you disagree with me.  PS Lemurs are cool   Jbh  Talk  23:53, 4 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm going to be helping with this article. I have many featured articles to my name, particularly about lemurs, but I haven't written on here in a couple years. I'd like your opinion about the following source: A Visit to the Lemur Conservation Foundation’s Lemur Reserve. It's a blog, but it's hosted by the Lemur Conservation Network (LCN), which is a project of the IUCN SSC Primate Specialist Group. The author is the organization's co-founder. The only thing I can find about blogs is on WP:BLPSPS, where some blogs are acceptable "so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control". The piece has opinions, but I do not plan on using them. I only plan to use it for it's facts about the organization, such as its history and programs. Your thoughts? – Maky  « talk » 05:07, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I do not see an issue for non-controversial stuff per WP:ABOUTSELF. What this article needs though is a couple solid third party RS. As it stands the article would most likely be deleted under the new WP:NORG guideline if it ever went to AfD so getting it to meet those requirements is where I think effort would be better spent. Jbh  Talk  17:00, 24 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Copy. As I said, I'll be working on this article. Progress will be slow because I'm working almost 12 hours a day and volunteering on the weekends. But relatively soon there will be a thorough rewrite complete with citations.