Draft:Conservation Humanities

Submission declined on 3 April 2026 by Lovelyfurball (talk). This draft is not written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia articles must be written neutrally in a formal, impersonal, and dispassionate way. They should not read like a blog post, advertisement, or fan page. Rewrite the draft to remove: promotional language: see Words to watch; personal commentary: opinions or direct addresses to the reader; informal language. Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject. If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted. If you need extra help, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted. Where to get help If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews. If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed. How to improve a draft Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia – a basic overview on how to edit Wikipedia. Help:Wikitext – how to use the markup Help:Referencing for beginners – how to include references Wikipedia:Article development – how to develop your article Wikipedia:Writing better articles – how to improve your article Wikipedia:Verifiability – make sure your article includes reliable third-party sources You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Add tags to your draft Editor resources Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs Declined by Lovelyfurball 4 months ago. Last edited by Proof finder 2 months ago. Reviewer: Inform author. Resubmit Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again.

Submission declined on 14 March 2026 by Nighfidelity (talk). This draft is not written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia articles must be written neutrally in a formal, impersonal, and dispassionate way. They should not read like a blog post, advertisement, or fan page. Rewrite the draft to remove: promotional language: see Words to watch; personal commentary: opinions or direct addresses to the reader; informal language. Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject. Declined by Nighfidelity 5 months ago.

Submission declined on 21 May 2025 by SafariScribe (talk). This draft reads like an essay or opinion piece. Wikipedia is not a place for original research or personal opinions. The draft should: summarize secondary sources: do not offer your own analysis or arguments; be written from a neutral point of view: represent the subject without bias, avoiding praise, criticism, or persuasive or promotional language; not contain original research: do not include new theories, unpublished ideas, or personal experiences. Instead, only summarize in your own words a range of independent, reliable, published sources that discuss the subject. Declined by SafariScribe 15 months ago.

• Comment: Phrases like "the mission of", "commitment to dialogue between...", and "brings together social and natural sciences" are out of place in an encyclopedic article Lovelyfurball (talk) 02:50, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Conservation Humanities is an interdisciplinary research field found within humanities disciplines such as environmental history, ecocriticism, and anthropology that addresses questions about nature conservation practices, issues, and challenges.^[1] It specifically advocates the necessity of involving the humanities in the effort to conserve biodiversity and halt species loss.^[2] Beyond its thematic interest in nature protection, Conservation Humanities practice is based on close involvement with conservation practictioners and to dialogue between humanities scholarship and conservation on the ground.^[3]

Conservation Humanities can be considered a part of the recent environmental turn across disciplines. As such, it is closely related to the Environmental Humanities. Like Environmental Humanities, it employs interdisciplinary set of approaches that embed humanities scholarship in the context of concern about climate change and environmental degradation.^[4]

Conservation Humanities is an emerging field of inquiry. It has its roots in Environmental History, in particular in the study of the historical development of national parks.^[5][6][7][8] The term Conservation Humanities was first institutionalised by the interdisciplinary project Corridor Talk: Conservation Humanities and the Future of Europe's National Parks, which was based at the Rachel Carson Center for Environment and Society at LMU Munich and the University of Leeds between 2020 and 2023. It has developed into a full research focus at the University of Oulu in Finland, where the research programme Biodiverse Anthropocenes^[9] brings together social and natural sciences to investigate biodiversity loss.

Category:Humanities Category:Interdisciplinary subfields Category:Research