Talk:Other effective area-based conservation measures

Qualifying for a Wikipedia article
Hi. I'm writing in response to your comment:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
 * in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
 * reliable
 * secondary
 * independent of the subject

I have no relationship to, the creator of this draft; I'm just another AfC reviewer like you. I am perplexed that you find the sources to be lacking. The following three sources cited in the article appear to easily meet all four criteria:


 * 
 * International Union for Conservation of Nature "IUCN Guidelines for Recognising and reporting OECMs"

Best, Clayoquot (talk &#124; contribs) 21:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Ah thank you, my mistake. I believe that I was attempting to flag it under "v" rather than "nn". Altough after going trough the article once again just now I do think that it should have made it into article space... My mistake.. I'll accept it now. I appreciate the heads up and I ask you only to bear with me as I have not been an AfC reviewer for long. Signed, Pichemist ( Contribs &#124; Talk ) 21:23, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Take care, Clayoquot (talk &#124; contribs) 21:31, 1 January 2023 (UTC)