Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Agriculture/Archive 5

Saffron FAR
I have nominated Saffron for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 23:06, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Notability of crop varieties
In writing an article for a specific crop variety, how do we establish it's WP:NOTABILITY? Varieties are a dime a dozen; some stay, but most are just discontinued and only sold for a few years at best. I recently came across Melody (potato) as an example, and I wasn't really sure how to address if that new article is really notable or not. Maybe this example can be fleshed out a bit, but my first glance pretty much just shows sources (i.e., sales sites) saying you can do general potato stuff with it. Are there any previous discussions of guidelines that have come up in the past on this topic?


 * I don't know, but we could see how WP:GNG helps or does not and maybe make a note about notability at the project page?  Montanabw (talk)  21:44, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Good question. I don't think I've ever seen a variety nominated for deletion. I think people creating variety articles may assume that WP:SPECIESOUTCOMES applies, although it's not clear that it should. You might poke around Category:Food plant cultivars to see what exists (and check out Category:Bromeliaceae cultivar for some low notability articles for ornamental plants). Plantdrew (talk) 23:18, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Lead image discussion
Discussion opening up on whether to change the lead image for cattle, see here. Montanabw (talk) 23:21, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Cattle
We are improving cattle to GA class. If anyone wants to help please say on the talk page! TheMagikCow (talk) 15:26, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Notability (breeds)
Please see Notability (breeds) for a draft of a future proposal for a notability guideline on domestic animal breeds. As your wiki-project is involved in this area, I am dropping off an invite to the discussion. Please visit Wikipedia talk:Notability (breeds). Thanks!  JT dale Talk ~ 16:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Herpetoculture wikiproject
FYI, there's a proposal for a wikiproject on herpetoculture. For the discussion, see WikiProject Council/Proposals/Herpetoculture -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 07:53, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Cattle article titles
There is an ongoing discussion at WT:LIVESTOCK about the titles of cattle articles. TheMagikCow (talk) 06:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Agriculture Wikithon at Land Grant University
Hi all, I'm a librarian at a land grant university on the east coast and am in the early stages of planning a Wikithon event for students in the agricultural sciences this fall. The overall goal is to enhance coverage of agricultural topics while also opening access to some of the great freely available resources and data that we have here on campus. I'm trying to determine the best way to go about this. In looking through the list of agriculture stubs, I could ask the participants to work on a stub flagged for further development ... but I also want to select topics relevant to our students. I'm curious if any of you have done any similar projects or have any suggestions. I certainly intend to communicate with an editor in advance so they know to expect a higher volume of edits during a particular time. I would also love to have someone from Wikipedia talk to our group about the importance of building agricultural related stubs and linking to valuable open data and puvlications. Additional thoughts/suggestions would be very welcome from this group. Thank you! Sciencelibrarian (talk) 20:23, 6 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Commented at your talk.  Montanabw (talk)  06:46, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Criollo people which affects several animal breeds. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:16, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

"Algerian Arab"
The naming and topic of Algerian Arab is under discussion, see talk:Algerian Arab -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:04, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Seeds of Death: Unveiling the Lies of GMOs
FYI the article about this film has been nominated for deletion. Ottawahitech (talk) 20:03, 10 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Monsanto must have staffers editing WP without COI disclosure... anyone else here notice that it is very difficult to get an environmentally-friendly viewpoint into any ag article?   Montanabw (talk)  00:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure what environmentally-friendly has to do with anything here. There's generally no problem getting such content about agriculture into articles when it's supported by science at least. There is a strong WP:FRINGE element when it comes to the public and agriculture, but that kind of content is purposely kept out according to Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Mockumentaries with glaring errors left and right, advocacy pieces, etc. usually don't get a free pass. Kingofaces43 (talk) 20:55, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * One person's "fringe" is another person's "verifiable by science but bullied out of WP content" by applying the wrong policies. Saying "mockumentary" is not AGF, it's fair to debate if the content may be viewed as fringe and the claims subject to challenge, sure but the same standard does need to be applied to Monsanto, which, frankly, funds a lot of the so-called peer reviewed research that is uncritically accepted as gospel on WP - even when characterized by poor design, suppressed data, and cherry-picked results.,   Montanabw (talk)  22:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Science topics don't use false middle arguments where one person's opinion is as valid as another. I'm not sure why you're mentioning AGF when we're not talking about editors. Mockumentary is a common moniker for advocacy films that spout countless disproven and blatantly false facts just for the shock value for uninitiated viewers (which this film is well documented as in WP:PARITY sources). We've gotten a few of those in agriculture topics lately, so we do need to be careful about unduly legitimizing such films or legitimizing viewpoints in discussion that cloud the scientific consensus by obsessing over Monsanto, etc. and ignoring what the actual independent science is saying.


 * Actually moving to general editor behavior, there does seem to a be a problem with ideas like pesticides are evil, Monsanto is evil, etc. that push some editor POVs too far in one direction resulting in a lot of energy spent trying to maintain a neutral point of view in the article. That can happen in the other direction if someone is pulling from strictly company sources (though I've seen this very rarely here and most postive sources used aren't quite glowing), but the main issue I've seen is that the neutral scientific sources get lumped into Monsanto conspiracy pile. More often than not, saying there is a Monsanto/corporate POV is used as a boogeyman that repels people well away from what such a POV would actually look like and even past where NPOV would lie from independent sources. Someone could maybe ask the climate change articles how they handle climate change deniers making the same arguments, but I'm not sure if this systemic problem is something this project might be able to discuss and possibly figure out some ways to handle it too. Kingofaces43 (talk) 23:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * You aren't getting it. The problem in the ag articles is that the people who are the equivalent of climate change deniers have taken these articles over and claim anything that even hints at the slightest degree of environmentalism or environmental responsibility is pseudoscience; you can't have a balanced discussion of organic food or farming, just to take one example. (sigh) There might be nutty fringe stuff about magic herbal cures or something elsewhere, but over here at WP FARM there are days I fell like this place is a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate ag, at least on the food and crop articles. (The animal ones, less so).  GMOs are of concern and the practices of Monsanto are not a conspiracy; they really do have a lot of problems.  I agree on neutral, unbiased sources, but absent those, then one "teaches the controversy" by brining in material from all sides and presenting it fairly.  It's not a false balance or a false middle if you think in terms of due weight and analysis.    Montanabw (talk)  09:24, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

"Grain"
The usage of is under discussion, see talk:food grain -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 05:49, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

"Atlantic Giant"
Can someone have a look at Atlantic Giant? It seems as though the article was rewritten in 2014 in an NPOV manner, and now consists of an intro that does not reveal the topic of the article, but instead is a criticism of the name. Also see the talk page. -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 06:16, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Calf
Folks here should be aware of two discussions at Talk:Calf and Talk:Calf. Montanabw (talk) 22:31, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

RM requested
RM has been requested at Talk:Calf_(disambiguation). Montanabw (talk) 23:08, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Honeywagon merge proposal
An IP user has objected to the above merge proposal, stating agricultural usage of the term - although there's no current mention the article. As such WP:AG members may wish to provide input on the discussion. (WP:Sanitation was notified back in October.) Little pob (talk) 11:17, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Seasons
Planting season and Sowing season have been nominated for deletion -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 04:38, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Tropical agriculture
The condition of the Tropical agriculture article is truly horrific. I'm going to try to do a little for it, but it needs a lot more attention than I can give it. CometEncke (talk) 10:11, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Someone with knowledgable of Western hay or silage practices needed
The article Conditioner (farming) has received a call for an expert, because the article is based largely (it appears) in commercial product descriptions, is at odds in terms of content and emphases with some identified sources (see Further reading and External links, at that article), and because the information that currently appears is completely unsourced. Can this Wikiproject identify someone with Western farm practise experience, perhaps with Ag Econ training, to take a look in on this article, and begin to revise it, and source the content that the expert finds to be accurate enough to remain? Cheers, Le Prof 50.129.227.141 (talk) 19:50, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Fly strike in sheep and Myiasis
The article Fly strike in sheep was badly in need of some fixing up, so I did that. I then discovered that the article Myiasis existed. I really don't know whether they should carry on to exist as two separate articles or be merged. Does anyone have an opinion on this? The subject is far outside of my areas of special knowledge. Invertzoo (talk) 01:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It's a specific term used in veterinary circles, so it makes more sense to have the articles separate. Us entomologists may use the term myiasis generally, but there's so many types that each generally can warrant their own article for the species or general group. The only things I see at first glance is that myiasis is a bit too human focused, and the the fly strike article could use a change in tone due to WP:NOTHOWTO. I don't see any need for a merge at least. Kingofaces43 (talk) 02:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Definitely not a merge. Needs more sourcing.  I wouldn't take out the "howto", but rather add more and better sourcing so that the prose becomes more encyclopedic.  That said, I haven't the time to be the person to do that.  Montanabw (talk)  05:10, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Assistance requested
Beekeeping in India seems like a notable topic, in the category tree of Category:Beekeeping by country. It needs major and vast improvement. Could any editors assist with this? AusLondonder (talk) 08:33, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

List of potato cultivars is quite sparse given the global importance of potatoes as a crop. Some obscure varieties have (brief) pages to themselves, but Maris Piper, the UK's most widely grown variety, doesn't. Any takers? Gavstero (talk) 13:26, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages
Greetings Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, — Delivered: 17:51, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Missing topics list
My missing topics list of agriculture updated - Skysmith (talk) 11:54, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Animal Agriculture Alliance
I have a few comments about this page: The description of the Animal Agriculture Alliance is misleading, as it fails to mention that the organization promotes the interests of corporations involved in livestock, GMOs, animal drugs, etc.

The statement "helps bridge the communication gap between farm and fork" is very general, and this page doesn't go into enough detail about what the AAA actually does. It does not say that a lot of the board members are involved with industrial agriculture corporations of their own, and does not reveal how much money they spend per year.

EJAlly (talk) 05:28, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Bull Riding Hall of Fame notability consensus requested
I added the Bull Riding Hall of Fame with this edit summary: Adding Bull Riding Hall of Fame created in 2012. Inducts already notable bull riders, bull fighters, bulls, and legends from PRCA, PBR, and other circuits, many from ProRodeo Hall of Fame. Ravenswing undid my entry citing: (Undid revision 764060585 by Dawnleelynn Is there any consensus indicating that all such members of this hall of fame are considered presumptively notable?) I replied with several third-party websites that show the notability of individuals who have been inducted into this hall of fame.

Another editor replied: There does not appear to be a WikiProject on bullriding, but there should be a project that incorporates this that I recommend you notifying of this discussion so they can chime in. I doubt many people who watch this page are familiar enough with the topic to voice an opinion. So I am notifying Agriculture and Agriculture/Livetock as bull riding falls under this umbrella wikiproject. Would appreciate some support.

Go to this page and section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(sports)#Rodeo_-_Bull_Riding_Hall_of_Fame_notability_in_question

dawnleelynn (talk) 03:56, 7 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Concur.  Montanabw (talk) 00:32, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Article for deletion
Museo de Aloe de Lanzarote has been proposed for deletion, and it is tagged with this project. I couldn't figure out how to add it to the list on this page, so I thought I'd mention it here. Leschnei (talk) 12:38, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Biodynamic agriculture
was categorised as High importance. I think that might have been a Steiner cultist, as I don't think most people in this project would ever even have heard of it, let alone consider it high importance. Guy (Help!) 12:26, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I agree with it being low importance as well. Definitely seems like a hotspot for WP:FRINGE proponents, so it could use more eyes. Kingofaces43 (talk) 18:57, 13 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I would agree that bumping to Mid or low importance would be appropriate. Actually, anyone with knowledge of organic agriculture is familiar with some biodynamic concepts, usually minus the woo-woo spirituality (farm feng shui?). Fringe might be a little harsh, though we can probably all agree that there is some nutty stuff in its history. It does no real harm and some of the concepts are adapted into modern organic agriculture.   Montanabw (talk) 03:49, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Are Bees domesticated? You are invited to join a discussion.
Please join our discussion at Talk:Beekeeping. More that opinions, we need sources that claim whether bees are domesticated or not. Thanks for your help. Cliff (talk) 15:16, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Commons:Photo challenge Tractors
FYI, take a look in commons:Commons:Photo challenge/2017 - April - Tractors if you have any file you'd like to upload, maybe in some of your archive at home. More importantly, we need some help for the categories. Many of the users are simple photographs, it is difficult to improve the categorization. We need more expert eyes.--Alexmar983 (talk) 15:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, will post at /Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of. We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
 * The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
 * The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
 * The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to for his original, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:15, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Breed article titles, again
There's been a bit of a respite from this, but please see Talk:Kaghani (goat). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:09, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

AfD for Chris Sherwin
A biography at AfD that may be of interest to Project Ag - see Articles_for_deletion/Chris_Sherwin. Atsme 📞📧 02:40, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Scientific images from WSC2017
Please take a look in here about newly uploaded scientific images on commons during Wiki Science Competitions 2017.--Alexmar983 (talk) 12:19, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Tagged for questionable notability
...Is American Soybean Association. I'm inclined to think it's notable because soybeans are a fairly large crop and seem to be gaining popularity because of the increase in health foods like soy milk. Maybe project members will be interested. I found it on New Page Review. White Arabian Filly Neigh 23:16, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * - it does meet the criteria for WP:ORG. Atsme 📞📧 23:07, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Azomite?
I've almost sent this article to AfD each time I've come across it. It's been tagged as having some serious issues and these tags have remained in place for a lengthy period. Please advise whether or not this belongs on this project and whether or not it is a potential AfD candidate/Move to draft candidate. Edaham (talk) 05:08, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I have concerns about this article. It feels like a puff piece - something that I see others have commented on on the talkpage. The article states that Azomite is a registered trademark, so is essentially a commercially protected name and marketing device. Is it standard for Wikipedia to have articles about such names, particularly when the article in question seems primarily to be providing validation for its subject matter? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 23:50, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Edaham: it is not good form to post the same question in multiple places, like you did here, and at WT:WikiProject_Geology. But then, the editors here might be more interested than us geology-types that Azomite has been categorized as an organic fertilizer. The last time I checked (a few years back, for sure) silica ore was inorganic. And not a fertilizer. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:20, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Disagree entirely. I’m not an expert in this field of whatever this article is about. It’s therefore entirely appropriate (and even recommended) for me to present my concerns to two (or however many) projects, I feel may either benefit from keeping/improving this article or helping to ascertain its suitability for inclusion in our project. This is in fact the reason why page reviewers add articles to one or more wiki-projects. WP:MULTI is not a great “rule” to start with, but in this case it’s completely inapplicable, since this isn’t a forked discussion, it’s two - one about whether or not the article is useful to agriculture and another about whether or not it’s useful to geology. Thanks for the time you spent checking it out. Edaham (talk) 07:16, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Although the question presented has different aspects, it is still one issue on one subject– the status of the article – with most of these aspects pertinent to both agriculture and geology. The problem of fragmented discussions on related issues, or a single issue, is exactly where WP:MULTI is applicable. Instead of posting identical questions at different places, without any mention of the other place, the preferred practice is exactly as WP:MULTI recommends: "start the discussion in one location, and, if needed, advertise that in other locations using a link." And now you know. Right? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:21, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up, It’s the policy I disagree with, not you specifically - not least of all because in this case, my posting it to two relevant projects hasn’t actually caused a problem. Everyone else involved simply got on with the task of looking at the issue and returning the required advice. If it helps you sleep at night I can do as you suggest next time. Also there are two “t”s in my name, but if you want the ping to work, you’ll have to use my user name which is Edaham, a portamanteau of several of my names. Edaham (talk) 05:45, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I once knew a guy who spelled it with a single "t", so I often miss the terminal "tt". ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:53, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Notice: I've raised a question at WikiProject Geology of whether we have a sense for retaining or deleting this article. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:14, 26 January 2018 (UTC)


 * - it's a trademarked product which is manufactured, not natural; it comprises natural substances. It looks like the company probably created the article. I sent it to AfD because the company does not meet the requirements for WP:CORP. Atsme 📞📧 23:04, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I was aware of that and this is exactly the action I wanted to propose but I thought I’d submit it to the appropriate panel/project page first to see if there’s anything salvageable that they might want from it. The creator has already been noticed regarding the paid/COI issue. I’ve tagged the article before (not for afd though) and had the tags removed so this has been a bit of a loose tooth I’ve been probing at for a while. Thank you. Edaham (talk) 07:07, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Agree. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:23, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Request for the Iteris Wikipedia article
Hello, WikiProject Agriculture participants. On behalf of Iteris, I have proposed an "Agriculture and weather" subsection for the current article's "Products" section (the proposed "Traffic and transportation" subsection is being discussed on the talk page, and I've also reached out to WikiProject Transport for feedback on that content). I am specifically looking at add information about the technologies developed by Iteris, and how they've been used, including a software system that suggests harvest times based on weather simulation and soil conditions. Are there any WikiProject Agriculture members willing to review the short section I've proposed about the company's agriculture- and weather-related products? I'm happy to answer any questions here or on the article's discussion page.

Thanks for any help in advance. Inkian Jason (talk) 20:19, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello again. I am still looking for a volunteer to review the content I've proposed adding to the Iteris Wikipedia article's "Products" section. I've now submitted a request to the talk page here, if any project members are able to take a look. Thanks in advance. Inkian Jason (talk) 17:38, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * This edit request has been answered. Inkian Jason (talk) 20:16, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject
The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template Transclude lead excerpt.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you. &mdash; The Transhumanist  10:53, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Missing article: Feral crop
It was noted at Talk:Feral that we really need coverage of this subject, because "feral" doesn't just apply to domesticated animals. (Feral plant, etc., would redirect to it.) Right now, all we have a tiny section with 2 sources at Feral. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  14:16, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

New articles

 * Greetings, I created two new articles and included this project because of listings on other like articles. If there are some that wish to take a look and possibly make improvements, including the project ratings I would appreciate it.


 * Verdale-de-l'Hérault (olive),
 * Ascolano (olive).
 * It would not take much to get to "Start-class". Thanks, Otr500 (talk) 11:33, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Animal husbandry
There is a discussion at Animal husbandry on whether baby farming should be listed as a see also item. Project members are invited to constribute. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:29, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nano Ganesh


The article Nano Ganesh has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "A product from a company which is covered by some newspapers when won a competition. It does not fulfill notability criteria because it fails 'significant coverage' after that event so fails WP:SUSTAINED. It is WP:NTEMP case in my opinion. WP:NOTPROMOTION may also apply."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nizil (talk) 12:10, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

RfC notice
This Talk:Monsanto may be of interest to this project.  petrarchan47  คุ  ก   17:54, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Capitalization of names of standardized breeds
Please see Village pump (policy).

This is a neutral RfC on a question left unanswered by MOS:LIFE (on purpose in 2012–2014, pending "later discussion"). It is now later, and lack of resolution of the question has held up MOS:ORGANISMS in draft proposal state for 6 years. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:03, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Merger proposal: Migrant worker/Foreign worker
Discussion is invited about a proposal to merge 'Foreign worker' into 'Migrant worker'. Thanks - Meticulo (talk) 12:31, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!
A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
 * – Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Bananas for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Bananas is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Bananas until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 07:14, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Agriculture for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Agriculture is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Agriculture until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 09:27, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

A possible Science/STEM User Group
There's a discussion about a possible User Group for STEM over at Meta:Talk:STEM_Wiki_User_Group. The idea would be to help coordinate, collaborate and network cross-subject, cross-wiki and cross-language to share experience and resources that may be valuable to the relevant wikiprojects. Current discussion includes preferred scope and structure. T.Shafee(Evo &#38; Evo)talk 03:04, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Agriculture
There is a discussion at Talk:Agriculture about the relevance of "Negative effects on slaughterhouse workers" to the article on Agriculture. WikiProject Agriculture members may wish to comment there. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:54, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:Fishing for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Fishing is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Fishing until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 06:15, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Brown Swiss
I've started a move discussion at Talk:Brown Swiss cattle which may be of interest. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:34, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Category:Cattlemen has been nominated for discussion
Category:Cattlemen, of interest to this project, has been nominated for possible merger. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. TSventon (talk) 12:20, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

AfD Bulldog breeds
I believe this project is an appropriate venue - you are invited to participate at Articles for deletion/Bulldog breeds Atsme Talk 📧 22:31, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Call for portal maintainers
Are there any editors from this WikiProject willing to maintain Portal:Agriculture? The Portals guideline requires that portals be maintained, and as a result numerous portals have been recently been deleted via MfD largely becasue of lack of maintenance. Let me know either way, and thanks, UnitedStatesian (talk) 07:09, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Intensive agriculture
Hi all. I'd like to work on the article above. I think it was incorrectly merged with factory farming and industrial farming (both somewhat politically charged terms). What is meant by the term intensive agriculture is what it says in the lede (the opposite of extensive agriculture), the rest of the article is off on some tangent. Incoming links from other agriculture articles and also prominently archaeology articles are getting the wrong info. Please see the talk page. I'd like to split the article again, and then work on the recommendations from the copy editing 2 years ago. Thoughts and otherwise welcome. Leo Breman (talk) 11:51, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

A biased editor who invents statistics
While going through the history of the article I just mentioned above. An editor caught my eye, I see he/she's been adding very long anti-meat sections and tables to many of the animal husbandry articles. Bit POV, but okay. But when I check his/her references, the numbers appear made up. I'm all for increasing sustainability in agribusiness, but proselytising and just inventing numbers is not the way to educate people... What to do about this? This person is very active, and going through everything seems like quite a bore. Should I post an example? Leo Breman (talk) 12:00, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I suggest you gather a reasonable sample of examples as editing diffs (chosen from different articles, different months), ask the editor to explain, and if the answer is unsatisfactory, take it to ANI. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:06, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, I looked at more edits, it's all the same problem -fake numbers/sources don't corroborate data. I can do the editing diffs... Sorta dread getting into a tussle. ANI is... Ah! Oof, looks official/heavy. Well, better put my arse where my mouth is, I guess. How many diffs? 3? 5? More? Leo Breman (talk) 12:48, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Just confronting them with proof is usually enough. 6-10 diffs? Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:50, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * 6-10, okay, that's a pile. You know what? I changed my mind, hehehe. I am just going to correct what I already got, make it clear in the edit summary what's up, I can't be bothered to do more. I'd rather work on the above article, that's more interesting than debating numbers, POV and false referencing with a guy on a mission. I'm not even completely adverse to his sentiment, just wish he'd go about it better. I'm very sorry, I shouldn't have brought it up if I wasn't invested. Thanks for the very timely response, though, Chiswick Chap! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leo Breman (talk • contribs) 10:13, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Managed intensive rotational grazing
I also think this article should just be renamed to "rotational grazing", or "intensive rotational grazing" if you really want to further distinguish it from herding or transhumance. The terminology "managed intensive rotational grazing" is used only once in a sentence in the first reference used when creating this Wikipedia article, not one other single reference uses it. The reference never uses the acronym MIRG sprinkled everywhere throughout the text.Leo Breman (talk) 15:36, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Agreed. You can try requesting the move, stating that it's uncontroversial. The alternative is a Request for Comment on the talk page to obtain consensus first. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:44, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Left something at the talk page, with ref and quote. Where does one request such a move? Leo Breman (talk) 16:10, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
 * If you are logged in and an 'extended confirmed' editor, you can just make the move yourself. I support this move. See Moving a page.Dialectric (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I tried, but failed... maybe because it was already moved once before? This is Moving_a_page issue, I think. Frankly I'm confused as to what type of move this is and which template I should use. Leo Breman (talk) 17:52, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

More on this article: I researched the terms "mob grazing" and "cell grazing"; both systems explicitly state they are not the same thing as normal rotational grazing, so am moving them out of the articles where it says they are synonyms. I made two new referenced entries here, grazing, to explain what is meant by these concepts. However, it appears that the term "mob grazing" redirects to "rotational grazing". Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leo Breman (talk • contribs) 15:08, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Now there's a better target, I've retargeted it. We must distinguish related but non-identical terms carefully. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:11, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * There's also a notability issue here; as far as I can deduce, the concept "mob grazing" was introduced in a 2008 article in a sustainable agriculture magazine by one Joel Salatin, a celebrity farmer/author in the alternative agriculture world with two Wikipedia articles devoted to him and his business... There is no research on it, just anecdotes. How many people practice it? A few in Britain and the USA apparently looking around online, but I'm guessing only a few hundred at most. Meanwhile at least a few hundred thousand people farm cuy, and there is no Wikipedia article on that at all.Leo Breman (talk) 17:46, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * As long as there are 2 reliable, independently published sources on a subject, it is reasonable to have an article on that subject. As with software or books, the issue isn't how many people use a given software tool or read/buy a given book, it is how much reliable coverage the subject has. If you have sources saying the method is not widely used, you can add that to the article. If a method covered in an article has no reliable source coverage, it could reasonably be removed. If you know of other popular farming methods that don't have wikipedia articles, but do have significant coverage, please feel free to create a new article.Dialectric (talk) 18:26, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you for the clarifying the policy, I can live with it. Neither of these terms have Wikipedia articles. I just wanted a brief definition considering someone has added these terms to a number of articles. "Cell grazing" would pass muster, but "mob grazing" looks problematic -the reference I used was written by the inventor (not independent). I could have said more, but I won't (I did actually, but just deleted that text, haha). We'll see about new articles, I want to have a better look around. Leo Breman (talk) 17:52, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
 * FYI, that isn't policy at all. WP:GNG is the relevant policy, and you can have a handful of sources and not having something be notable. I'll try to check this one out a bit later. Kingofaces43 (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
 * So in checking out the articles, I noticed that Rotational grazing is a redirect, while what appears to be the general rotational grazing article is at Management intensive rotational grazing. Would it be better to swap the two? That would make more sense with Grazing. Kingofaces43 (talk) 13:51, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is what I believe we have agreed, they are the wrong way around. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:55, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I put in a request at Requested moves/Technical requests since page move doesn't work when the new target already exists. Kingofaces43 (talk) 14:39, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Sustained production levels
How about this? This redirects to conservation agriculture -terribly sourced, but not terribly written, at first glance (save acronym usage). Seems nonsense to claim that with "sustained production levels" writers here actually mean "conservation agriculture". One would assume a light bulb factory, oil well or a uranium mine might opt for reasonably "sustained production levels". If this, what else is being redirected there? Can we just get rid of it totally? Leo Breman (talk) 16:05, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) If a redirect is pointing to the wrong place, you can just retarget it.
 * 2) If it is not a sensible search term (i.e., nobody would think of typing it in) you can take it to xfd to get it discussed for deletion. Doesn't seem to apply here.
 * 3) To find out what links to an article, look at the "tools" menu on the left hand side: you'll see a "What links here" tool. Just run it from within the article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:47, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks Chiswick, I looked for other redirects, the rest all check out. This article is text-wise really not that bad: first few sources are reputable and check out, minimum of polemics and editorializing -just needs wikilinks, some copy editing, less acronyms, inline referencing... Regarding "sustained production levels": it is from a phrase in the FAO definition of "conservation agriculture". To wit: “a concept for resource-saving agricultural crop production that strives to achieve acceptable profits together with high and sustained production levels while concurrently conserving the environment”; i.e. "sustained production levels" is in itself not synonymous with "conservation agriculture". Once I got rid of it in Cattle feeding, not a single article uses it as a wikilink, fide "What links here". You say people might think of typing it in? It's just a random phrase... I don't know where it should point. Leo Breman (talk) 19:38, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
 * In that case either leave it here (as harmless) or submit it to Redirects for deletion, with your reasons. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:33, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Dairy production and methane emissions
Here are initial notes for an article on Dairy production and methane emissions. The article will take some time to write, close reading of sources, and probably more research-- so participation by multiple editors would be helpful! Oliveleaf4 (talk) 15:44, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * At a quick glance, the notes need to be widened out to cover the world, not just the US. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:57, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * If you add more extensive information, that's fine with me! My thinking is that putting a general article up, even if it gets the [unsightly] tag "does not reflect a global view", would get more attention from prospective editors than an article on the US only. Oliveleaf4 (talk) 16:37, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, and having US in the title would be needlessly specialized. Good luck with the project. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:53, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:23, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

FAR notice
I have nominated History of saffron for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Absq124 (talk) 06:49, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

The 2020 WikiCup is on!
Do you want a fun and exciting Wiki challenge? An opportunity to get involved in some of the most important editing on Wikipedia? A giant shiny cup to display on your userpage? Well then you should join the WikiCup challenge! Folks of all experience levels are welcome to join. It's a good way for veteran editors to test their mettle, and for new users to learn the ropes. The competition revolves around content creation, such as good and featured articles, DYK's, reviewing such content, and more. See WikiCup/Scoring for full details. Over the course of the year, users compete to create the most and best content in a round based format. The top performers in each round will advance to the next, until just 8 remain in the final round. Out of those, one Wikipedian will walk away with the coveted silver Wikicup. Could that user be you? Find out by signing up! Signups are open until January 31, 2020. May the editing be ever in your favor! Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 22:00, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Merger proposal:Breed standard
An article of interest to the project&mdash;Breed standard&mdash;has been proposed for merging with Breed type. Project members are invited to participate at the merger discussion. Cavalryman (talk) 02:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC).

Category:Livestock guardians has been nominated for discussion
Category:Livestock guardians, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Currently proposing to containerize and split the livestock guardians to make livestock guardians refer to all livestock guardian species (non-dog and dog alike), and to create the new containerized category for livestock guardian dogs within it. This will hopefully take guardian animals currently categorized in Category:Working animals out of there into this more specific, but still broad category. Wcconey (talk) 11:42, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

15,000 photos of plants, plant diseases, and plant pests now in the public domain
I am pleased to inform you that all images at https://www.flickr.com/photos/scotnelson/ are now CC-0 public domain. If you find any of use, please upload them directly to Commons using the template, which contains the corresponding OTRS ticket. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 02:29, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Updating the ADM article re: cocoa products
Hello, David here with Archer-Daniels-Midland Company. I've shared a request at Talk:ADM (company) to update the article re: cocoa products. The Products section says the company still produces cocoa products even though ADM's cocoa business was sold in 2015 (as mentioned in the Wikipedia article's own text). I won't edit the article myself, but I'm hoping an editor here at WikiProject Agriculture could update the page for me. Thanks! ADM DavidW (talk) 20:22, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

List of fictional vegetarian characters nominated for deletion, comments are requested
Hello all! I was deeply disappointed to see today that the article I created on September 7, not even 20 days ago, was nominated for deletion. Please comment on Articles for deletion/List of fictional vegetarian characters so the page can be saved, even if you aren't a vegetarian. The more people who comment, the better, as I'd like the page to be improved. Thanks! Historyday01 (talk) 05:39, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Fred Kirschenmann
I recently created an article for noted sustainable farming advocate Fred Kirschenmann. It is a work in progress. Feel free to assist. Thank you! Thriley (talk) 01:25, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Fungicide needs a lot of work
I came across this a few weeks back. Agriculture isn't really my thing, but it seems like it would be an important topic, except the article is really bad.

We've got undue weight to "natural" fungicides while other more commonly used ones are basically ignored. The natural list is also badly sourced. Some are well sourced, others are little better than "some gardener thinks they work, and now we've put it on a website, so that makes it true". I'm also not sure if its appropriate to list substances that have been shown to have some fungicidal properties, but aren't in any serious use.

The into feels like it was once good, but people have added little things here and there, dropping the quality down.

The upside is the resistances section seems good to me (not an expert though).

I've cross posted this on WikiProject Fungi too. Kylesenior (talk) 04:50, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Guinea pig Featured article review
I have nominated Guinea pig for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  16:01, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Discussion about name change of reuse of excreta
A discussion is underway about changing the name of reuse of excreta. Please take part in the discussion on the talk page here.EMsmile (talk) 01:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Carnivorous starfish destroying Great Barrier Reef -- sugar cane farming culprit?
A story in the BBC is blaming Sugarcane farming for the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef. Is this of interest to this wikiproject? XOttawahitech (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottawahitech (talk • contribs) 00:11, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-26183209

Most-viewed stub article within this Wikiproject
Kharif crop	17,924	597	Stub--Coin945 (talk) 16:21, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

discussion about the agriculture article improvement
i have recenlty created article on agriculture and I'm intrested to improve agriculure article on Wikipedia. Hardyisback11188 (talk) 06:14, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Domesticated species/subspecies should not be given a conservation label of "domesticated
The IUCN Red List does not recognize "domesticated" as a conservation category as seen here. I tried removing that label from the articles on domesticated species/subspecies but insists I given reliable sources but the burden of proof should be on them. LittleJerry (talk) 21:59, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

History of saffron FAR
I have nominated History of saffron for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 15:08, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

FAR for Durian
I have nominated Durian for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Talk 17:37, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like and turns it into something like
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from cite web, cite journal and doi.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Agriculturalist vs agronomist
These terms both redirect to the Agriculturist article, however we have Category:Agriculturalists and Category:Agronomists. Is there a substantive difference between the two or should the category articles be merged (possibly at Category:Agriculturists)? Just wanted to check before going to CfD. ITBF (talk) 12:43, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Agronomy focuses on crops, so that redirect would be incorrect. Agriculturalist isn't really used that often because of how broad it is. Just glancing at the agriculturalist article, it does look a bit WP:SYNTHy since the initial sourcing doesn't match up or is very primary and obscure. KoA (talk) 20:59, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

World Soil Day - deserving of independent article?
I believe World Soil Day is deserving of its own article. It has significant coverage and the year deemed International Year of Soil is getting further and further away from us. Any thoughts on this? Either way, happy World Soil Day. - Wil540 art (talk) 00:37, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * https://www.vaticannews.va/en/world/news/2022-12/world-soil-day-united-nations-environmental-awareness-earth.html
 * https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/new-updates/world-soil-day-2022-history-significance-and-theme-of-the-day/articleshow/95995492.cms

AGCO COI edit requests
Hi! I've posted some COI edit requests at Talk:AGCO – dividing up a lengthy History section and adding a bit of recent information. Sharing in case anyone here is interested in taking a look. Thank you for any help or feedback! Mary Gaulke (talk) 19:12, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Limousin cattle
Limousin cattle has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:07, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

See this post from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mammals : 40-50+ pages needing Wikiprojects Assessment/Tags
Many pages of animals do not have either wikiprojects attached to them or even existant talk pages, on this linked post i listed in my sandbox (since otherwise it would clogged a lot) about 300 such pages, some of which are pertinent to this wikiproject, notably 8 individual bovines, 1 individual sheep, 17 Cattle breeds, 8 goats breeds, 10 sheep breeds and many more like Fly grazing and Laystall.

Entry of the talk page : Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mammals

Cheers ! Gimly24 (talk) 21:11, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment nomination of Colony collapse disorder
Colony collapse disorder has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:36, 21 January 2023 (UTC)


 * With respect to bee colony collapse,it has been claimed See https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2023/03/14/honeybee-health-driving-problem-is-not-climate-or-pesticides-but-the-deadly-varroa-mite/ that the varroa mite is the main cause of bee death. (without citing any papers).
 * I cannot see that this subject is treated in this varroa article.It would be extremely useful if papers supporting or disproving this "fact" would be given in this article on varroa.Spgough (talk) Spgough (talk) 15:41, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments are used by Wikipedia editors to rate the quality of articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a class parameter to WikiProject banner shell, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to WikiProject banner shell, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project decides to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass WPBannerMeta a new custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:42, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Help request on Commons
I recently added a bunch of images to Commons:Category:Shafer Museum, including quite a few agricultural implements and farm vehicles. Not a topic I know much about, and no doubt someone knowledgeable could do a lot to improve descriptions and categorizations of these. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 22:33, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

ADM History section
Hi there, I'm a representative of ADM and I've been posting on the ADM Talk page about potential edits to the article's History section. Because I have a clear COI, I want to ensure that any changes to the article reflect clear community consensus. As such, I wanted to reach out to relevant WikiProjects to see if members could review my suggestions and offer feedback. Any thoughts you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. ADMDane (talk) 21:10, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Wedding Date Correction
Hello. I work at The Wonderful Company, and I am hoping an editor would be willing to correct the wedding date of Stewart and Lynda Resnick-they were married in 1972, as is correctly noted on Lynda Resnick’s page. However, on Stewart Resnick’s page the year is listed incorrectly as 1973 in the personal life section. I've studied Wikipedia's guidelines regarding COI editing and believe my disclosures have been posted appropriately. Appreciate any assistance that can be provided in making this correction. RachelOstroff (talk) 20:31, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

Consumer Protections
Can we do more investigative research on consumer protections related to the U.S. history of beef production, advertising, promotion, childhood nutrition/education, and regulatory bodies of the U.S.D.A., F.D.A. and other governing bodies. Some questions to consider for the investigation, which should be conducted by legal scholars unaffiliated with Congress or scholars who study the history of American agriculture:

1) What are the conflicts of interest between the U.S.D.A., the F.D.A. and the American cattleman's Association? 2) How large is the corporate lobby of the American Cattleman's Association? 3) Which U.S. representatives and senators are endorsed by the American Cattleman's association?

Research areas: conflicts of interest, consumer protection, U.S. corporate lobbying, fair elections, clean policy, citizenship protections MokshaFarm (talk) 20:42, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

ADM Dwayne Andreas section
Hi there, this is Dane again, a representative of ADM. I've got a new request posted on the ADM Talk page about adding a Dwayne Andreas subsection. I'm hoping to get feedback from relevant WikiProjects, including this one. Any thoughts or suggestions you can provide would be greatly appreciated. ADMDane (talk) 17:17, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Milk quota
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Milk quota that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – Material  Works  17:05, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Structure of "Agriculture in xxxcountry" articles?
I am currently working on agriculture in Turkey but am unsure what the structure should be - any suggestions? Chidgk1 (talk) 09:46, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Looking for better lead pic for Agriculture in Turkey
If you have any idea please suggest at Talk:Agriculture_in_Turkey Chidgk1 (talk) 11:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC)