Talk:Green Revolution

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Green Revolution article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Agriculture High‑importance

	Agriculture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

History of Science High‑importance

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology Mid‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and drink Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Science Policy Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Climate change Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our recommended sources and our style guide

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Hunger#Malnutrition mortality statistics|Mortality statistics w/references in Wikipedia article on hunger.]] The anchor (#Malnutrition mortality statistics) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Archives

1

China part of Green Revolution

China part of the article reads like something taken directly from the Chinese official propaganda textbooks.

And not new ones, considering such peculiarities like the "Agrarian Reform Law of 1950, which ended private land ownership and gave land back to the peasants" - which is self-contradictory.

Also suggesting that Great Leap Forward was beneficial for food security in China, when in reality it caused one of the greatest famines in history, reads like a morbid joke. Or an official Maoist propaganda, take your pick.

This definetly doesn't fit Wikipedia rules about unbiased articles. 176.106.33.167 (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

POV

The article gives a very pro-Green Revolution view, and little voice is given to the many reliable sources that are more critical of it.

Here is a variety of sources that take a more critical eye to the Green Revolution - they represent a variety of views on it, from "on the whole positive but not without major flaws" to "wholly negative". There are plenty more sources that could be incorporated into the article than these.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-matters/2014/apr/01/norman-borlaug-humanitarian-hero-menace-society

https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/edit/10.4324/9780203840443/green-revolution-revisited-bernhard-glaeser

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11024-019-09372-7

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/green-revolution-norman-borlaug-race-to-fight-global-hunger/

http://kyle.dyson.cornell.edu/aem 4640/Hazell green rev paper.pdf

https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/how-unintended-consequences-unraveled-a-legendary-agricultural-achievement/2020/04/17/b62f0f04-7ff0-11ea-8013-1b6da0e4a2b7_story.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/farm-protests-in-india-are-writing-the-green-revolutions-obituary/

https://ourworldindata.org/reducing-fertilizer-use

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/27/using-far-less-chemical-fertiliser-still-produces-high-crop-yields-study

https://agricultureandfoodsecurity.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40066-023-00409-5

Furthermore, I don't think "Norman Borlaug's response to criticism" deserves its own section. Eldomtom2 (talk) 17:01, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the situation is a bit more complex than that. There is in fact some critical material in the main text (perhaps moved out of the deprecated 'Criticism' section). There is therefore a danger of duplication if materials are added to 'Criticism' or 'Responses' or whatever. We need to remove the section altogether and apply the new sources wherever they fit in the main text. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:09, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no policy against "reception" or "assessment" sections. With how controversial the Green Revolution is I think such a section would be appropriate, providing it gave adequate weight to both those who think the Green Revolution was a good thing and those who think it was a bad thing.--Eldomtom2 (talk) 17:15, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't, indeed, but that doesn't licence duplication, nor a definite non-neutral tone throughout the article. The whole thing beads a careful rewrite; the assessment could either be built into each section, or at the end. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:15, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan benifitted the most from green revolution and it bought about an economic revolution in Pakistan

It's about Pakistan role in hyv 39.34.47.183 (talk) 17:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]