Talk:Peak food

slanted
I agree with the article completely. And that's not a good sign for Wikipedia... We present basically one point of view on the topic. I guess we should at least tone it down, and probably expand with different predictions. --174.119.186.126 (talk) 04:20, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

-- no offence to the author but it reads like a year 7 high school essay, this article is not NPO and should be largly rewritten —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.179.154.192 (talk) 06:00, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Civilization
Why does anyone want to add that to Wikilink "coming in the future"? It no sense makes. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:40, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

reference 1
reference 2 ==

The second referenced article is nothing but a verbatim copy of the first article. Claiming them as two different sources misrepresents the number of sources. Ender8282 (talk) 03:38, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I have replaced second reference Ender8282 (talk) 03:38, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Malthusianism
"Peak Food" is an old concept that goes back a ways. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusianism Malthusianism is the core source of the idea of food limitation. There are also several other applications of the Peak equations. This is the simple measure of a limited resource (Renewable resources are limited as well) against an expanding demand. Peak Tuna Peak Meat Peak Steel several references to Malthus and others should be included — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tptorpey (talk • contribs) 15:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the information. Could you provide a reference that connects the two concepts? Feel free to Be Bold and expand the article if you can find a references that support such a connection, Sadads (talk) 14:18, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

redirect
I have redirected this article to food security for now. I think this is certainly a notable topic, but the article was just a mess of WP:NOR and WP:NPOV violations. When I cut out all the OR and POV I was left with a single sentence, and not an especially good one. The only thing in it that could possibly have been an RS was an editorial - which makes for not a great source - and also was about food security and not peak food anyway. If anyone wants to put the time in to it to fix it and produce a passable article, feel free to revert the redirect.Kevin (talk) 00:27, 18 September 2011 (UTC)