Amhonigman (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
→GMO food/GM crops: new section |
||
Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
Question, what specific international organizations have disputed the use of genetic modification on food?[[User:Amhonigman|Amhonigman]] ([[User talk:Amhonigman|talk]]) 20:50, 24 September 2019 (UTC) |
Question, what specific international organizations have disputed the use of genetic modification on food?[[User:Amhonigman|Amhonigman]] ([[User talk:Amhonigman|talk]]) 20:50, 24 September 2019 (UTC) |
||
== GMO food/GM crops == |
|||
I am going to work through these articles over the next few months in an attempt to improve them. The two are closely related so I will probably work on them simultaneously. My thinking at the moment is to treat the crop one as more focused on the production side and the food one more on the product. The crop one should focus more on the environmental aspects while this one will be more on health. There will unfortunately be some overlap and repetition between the two articles, but this is unavoidable. I also see some problems when it comes to the controversy sections, but will deal with that when I get to it. Any thoughts or advice will be appreciated. [[User:Aircorn|AIR<b style="color: green;">''corn''</b>]] [[User talk:Aircorn|(talk)]] 09:16, 2 November 2019 (UTC) |
Revision as of 09:16, 2 November 2019
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Template:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology
Template:WikiProject Genetics
![]() |
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 January 2019 and 8 March 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ashleyatnyu (article contribs).
Index
|
||||||||||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Student project
In the introduction of the article it mentions that there is controversy over the fact that certain GMO products have been subject to intellectual property. That is really interesting and the source for it is a really good source however there is no mention of GMOs as intellectual property anywhere else in the article and that can be elaborated on. The article could also elaborate on the environmental impacts of GMOs. Every fact is referenced with a citation throughout the article. The links to the references work. Otherwise the article has a lot of sources, everything is relevant to the article and it is neutral.— Atate27 (talk) 18:53, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
I saw that and also expected there to be an elaboration in the article. If nothing else, it seemed reasonable to link that sentence to the more specific "plant breeder rights" article than the general "intellectual property" article, although that article could use some expansion. So little attention is given to plant patents in popular culture apart from genetically engineered plans that I don't think most people realize that practically every item of produce in the grocery store is patented or off an expired patent. Mfedder (talk) 01:16, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
A note about recent edits
About [2] and a corresponding edit at Genetically modified crops, even though the editor has been blocked, it actually is the case that the language has been around for some time at Genetically modified organism. I think that it would be OK to leave these edits as is. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:50, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Have to disagree and have reverted the edit - which was copied from another article. The studies reviewed were preliminary (in rats) and non-specific to GMO consumer foods. --Zefr (talk) 21:37, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- If I remember right (just heading out the door), the original edit came up just after the GMO RfC when there were other kerfuffles going on that more or less shut down editing. It ended up being a hold over in genetically modified organism since then. It's is fairly contradictory with the GMO RfC finding in terms of weight so that's mostly why it was removed. Kingofaces43 (talk) 21:43, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Cathry added it in July 2016.[3] The RFC had just closed a couple of weeks earlier. Maybe it was missed. Maybe editors were over arguing. Either way it has a weak consensus at that article. Personally I feel it is undue, but I also think we can afford to wait a further two weeks until Cathry comes back. AIRcorn (talk) 22:21, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. It's fine with me to leave it reverted, as I don't feel strongly either way. I just figured it was the right thing for me to do, to point it out in case anyone was going to revert it without being aware. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:00, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- Given that there seems to be a consensus here, I've removed it from the other two pages as well. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:06, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Genetically modified food. 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/20150107073644/http://www.hawaiipapaya.com/rainbow.htm to http://www.hawaiipapaya.com/rainbow.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150109042604/http://etd.uovs.ac.za/ETD-db/theses/available/etd-10042011-094627/unrestricted/MarxGM.pdf to http://etd.uovs.ac.za/ETD-db/theses/available/etd-10042011-094627/unrestricted/MarxGM.pdf
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060605232122/http://southeastfarmpress.com/mag/farming_world_soybean_consumption/index.html to http://southeastfarmpress.com/mag/farming_world_soybean_consumption/index.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150326181805/http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/database/enzymes/83.chymosin.html to http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/database/enzymes/83.chymosin.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140326015714/http://ideaireland.org/library/idea-position-on-genetically-modified-foods/ to http://ideaireland.org/library/idea-position-on-genetically-modified-foods/
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: 5 June 2024).
- 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) 18:55, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Question, what specific international organizations have disputed the use of genetic modification on food?Amhonigman (talk) 20:50, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
GMO food/GM crops
I am going to work through these articles over the next few months in an attempt to improve them. The two are closely related so I will probably work on them simultaneously. My thinking at the moment is to treat the crop one as more focused on the production side and the food one more on the product. The crop one should focus more on the environmental aspects while this one will be more on health. There will unfortunately be some overlap and repetition between the two articles, but this is unavoidable. I also see some problems when it comes to the controversy sections, but will deal with that when I get to it. Any thoughts or advice will be appreciated. AIRcorn (talk) 09:16, 2 November 2019 (UTC)