| Revision as of 15:45, 13 September 2018 editKoA (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers26,866 edits →Roundup =/= Glyphosate: r← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:17, 13 September 2018 edit undoPetrarchan47 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users14,771 edits →Due weight a Roundup Cancer coverage.: rNext edit → | ||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
| There are articles on the net which claim that monsanto bought vast tracts of land in Ukraine. The sale had something to do with an IMF loan which would not have been granted without that sale. Does Bayer now own these, too, and what were the intentions and activities with that land? ] (]) 02:40, 10 June 2018 (UTC) | There are articles on the net which claim that monsanto bought vast tracts of land in Ukraine. The sale had something to do with an IMF loan which would not have been granted without that sale. Does Bayer now own these, too, and what were the intentions and activities with that land? ] (]) 02:40, 10 June 2018 (UTC) | ||
| == Due weight |
== Due weight at Roundup Cancer coverage. == | ||
| My edit was reverted for "undue weight". From ]: "Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Misplaced Pages editors or the general public." | My edit was reverted for "undue weight". From ]: "Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Misplaced Pages editors or the general public." | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
| It should be on WP too. Therefore I will restore my edit. KoA43 was wrong in claiming my edit added undue weight. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px #B8B8B8;">]]]</span>''' 09:25, 13 September 2018 (UTC) | It should be on WP too. Therefore I will restore my edit. KoA43 was wrong in claiming my edit added undue weight. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px #B8B8B8;">]]]</span>''' 09:25, 13 September 2018 (UTC) | ||
| :Please respect the intent of 1RR here. The idea that glyphosate or its formulations are carcinogenic is pretty much ], so if we do mention those viewpoints, they are very subdued. Court cases aren't exactly ] here either. Consensus has repeatedly been that we cover the case to a degree in that it happened, but major weight issues occur when someone tries to expound the viewpoints of those bringing that case forward. ] (]) 15:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC) | :Please respect the intent of 1RR here. The idea that glyphosate or its formulations are carcinogenic is pretty much ], so if we do mention those viewpoints, they are very subdued. Court cases aren't exactly ] here either. Consensus has repeatedly been that we cover the case to a degree in that it happened, but major weight issues occur when someone tries to expound the viewpoints of those bringing that case forward. ] (]) 15:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC) | ||
| ::Where did consensus emerge that if a court case make findings that are novel, they should not be mentioned in the encyclopedia? Using MEDRS to support that idea is a gross misunderstanding of ]. My added coverage is nothing but the minimum that was reported by all sources, these sources are the ones we refer to when covering non medical issues. You appear to be wanting to sanitize the coverage here. That puts editors in an uncomfortable position. The findings in the case were definitely a first, which you refer to as "fringe", another gross misinterpretation of the guidelines. It was the first time internal documents from Monsanto had been revealed, and what was in those documents showed the jury that Monsanto "knew or should have known" that their product causes cancer. Further the documents showed the company was manipulating and ghostwriting science, and covering up studies that showed harm. So that has to be taken into consideration when speaking of related literature, possibly manipulated, that has been available thus far. That too should be mentioned for the reader. It isn't possible to give this landmark case proper encyclopedic coverage while sticking to what has been said with regard to cancer in the past. | |||
| :::Please show me where the community found otherwise. '''<span style="text-shadow:7px 7px 8px #B8B8B8;">]]]</span>''' 17:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC) | |||
| == Roundup =/= Glyphosate == | == Roundup =/= Glyphosate == | ||
Revision as of 17:17, 13 September 2018
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Monsanto article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
 | The following Misplaced Pages contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
Bayer will retire Monsanto name on June 7th
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/04/with-deal-to-close-this-week-bayer-to-retire-monsanto-name.html Shushugah (talk) 19:10, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Also Rupert Neate (4 June 2018). "Monsanto to ditch its infamous name after sale to Bayer". The Guardian. Retrieved 11 August 2018. Pol098 (talk) 20:14, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Ukraine
There are articles on the net which claim that monsanto bought vast tracts of land in Ukraine. The sale had something to do with an IMF loan which would not have been granted without that sale. Does Bayer now own these, too, and what were the intentions and activities with that land? 2001:8003:A928:800:D987:A121:5FC1:F91D (talk) 02:40, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Due weight at Roundup Cancer coverage.
My edit was reverted for "undue weight". From WP:DUE: "Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Misplaced Pages editors or the general public."
The mention of what the jury found, and the reason for the large fine, were reported in all coverage of this case:
Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/10/monsanto-trial-cancer-dewayne-johnson-ruling
NBC https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/jury-orders-monsanto-pay-290m-roundup-trial-n899811
Vox https://www.vox.com/2018/8/11/17678532/monsanto-roundup-causes-cancer-jury
It should be on WP too. Therefore I will restore my edit. KoA43 was wrong in claiming my edit added undue weight. petrarchan47คุก 09:25, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- Please respect the intent of 1RR here. The idea that glyphosate or its formulations are carcinogenic is pretty much WP:FRINGE, so if we do mention those viewpoints, they are very subdued. Court cases aren't exactly WP:MEDRS here either. Consensus has repeatedly been that we cover the case to a degree in that it happened, but major weight issues occur when someone tries to expound the viewpoints of those bringing that case forward. Kingofaces43 (talk) 15:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- Where did consensus emerge that if a court case make findings that are novel, they should not be mentioned in the encyclopedia? Using MEDRS to support that idea is a gross misunderstanding of WP:MEDRS. My added coverage is nothing but the minimum that was reported by all sources, these sources are the ones we refer to when covering non medical issues. You appear to be wanting to sanitize the coverage here. That puts editors in an uncomfortable position. The findings in the case were definitely a first, which you refer to as "fringe", another gross misinterpretation of the guidelines. It was the first time internal documents from Monsanto had been revealed, and what was in those documents showed the jury that Monsanto "knew or should have known" that their product causes cancer. Further the documents showed the company was manipulating and ghostwriting science, and covering up studies that showed harm. So that has to be taken into consideration when speaking of related literature, possibly manipulated, that has been available thus far. That too should be mentioned for the reader. It isn't possible to give this landmark case proper encyclopedic coverage while sticking to what has been said with regard to cancer in the past.
- Please show me where the community found otherwise. petrarchan47คุก 17:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Roundup =/= Glyphosate
In this edit, KoA43 mentions the safety of Glyphosate in the Roundup section, conflating the two, just as Bayer is doing.
From coverage of the recent Roundup cancer trial:
- " never mentions Roundup, instead using the word glyphosate. This is intentional, he noted.
- "Glyphosate is "different than Roundup" since it includes a cocktail of other chemicals, which increases its weed killing potency. Wisner pointed out that the jury in California focused heavily on the "synergistic effect of the glyphosate and the other chemicals."
- "And the simple fact is, Monsanto has never tested the carcinogenicity of the combined product," Wisner added. https://www.dw.com/en/did-monsanto-know-its-weed-killer-could-be-deadly-to-people/a-45116915
- "And the last thing is—and this is really important—is that Mr. Partridge doesn’t say Roundup doesn’t cause cancer; he says glyphosate. And he does that intentionally, because he knows that glyphosate is different than Roundup. Now, glyphosate is part of Roundup, but Roundup is a combined product of glyphosate plus a bunch of other chemicals that make glyphosate significantly more potent. And one of the things that the jury is really focused on, this jury in our case, was that there’s a synergistic effect of the glyphosate and the other chemicals. And the simple fact is, Monsanto has never tested the carcinogenicity of the combined product. And this omission is glaring, and it’s intentional. In fact, we have internal documents that say, “We do not want to look at this issue because we’re afraid of what we’re going to see.” And the jury heard all this, and they rejected this idea that it’s a safe product, that it doesn’t cause cancer. And they said not only does it cause cancer, but that Monsanto acted with malice in doing so. I think that’s really important." https://www.democracynow.org/2018/8/14/historic_ruling_against_monsanto_finds_company
Please amend the edit so that it is scientifically accurate and encyclopedic. petrarchan47คุก 09:49, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- None of these are WP:MEDRS or WP:SCIRS and would seem to contradict what good sources actually do have to say about synergistic effects or risks of the formulations. What's currently there has been agreed upon text that accurately represents the sources in previous discussions, so that currently is the scientifically accurate version. Glyphosate-based_herbicides has more on that. Kingofaces43 (talk) 15:45, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- All unassessed articles
- C-Class Agriculture articles
- Mid-importance Agriculture articles
- WikiProject Agriculture articles
- C-Class company articles
- Mid-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- C-Class St. Louis articles
- Mid-importance St. Louis articles
- C-Class Missouri articles
- Mid-importance Missouri articles
- C-Class Environment articles
- Mid-importance Environment articles
- Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press
- Articles edited by connected contributors