Jump to content

Talk:Agriculture in China

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Suggestions for Improvement (Copied from Wikipedia:Requests for feedback)

[edit]

I recently created this article on the agriculture of China, and I need suggestions on what improvements might be made. Specifically, are there any important segments of information anyone feels I've left out or need expanding? Are there any statements in dire need of citations? How could the article be improved graphically? Thanks! johnpseudo 19:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

That's a very nice article! It's well organized into sections and is well written in an easy to read style. You are right in that some additional citations could be used. There are several entire sections that don't have a single citation, including the introduction, Communism in China, and Major agricultural products. You might want to use citation templates for your references since the simple links provided for your online sources aren't very informative of what the sources are. Also, the images should all be related to the content of the article and they all should be captioned. For example, it would be more appropriate to have a climatological map rather than a political map of the country (if you can find or get someone to make a agricultural map, that would be even better), and the image of terraced fields should be related to something in the text regarding the use of terraces in Chinese agriculture. Overall it's a very nice article. Thanks for posting and happy editing! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 12:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it sure could use some numbers in production. for an article about agriculture, it seems like those matter. the costs of these goods can vary, metric tonnage is set — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.49.6.225 (talk) 08:12, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

livestock

[edit]

that paragraph appears to be cut-off, mid sentence.

Proposed merge

[edit]

Regarding the tag that Vmenkov just put up: I agree with merging, and think anything short of merging these two articles would be frivolous. I had never noticed Agriculture in the People's Republic of China before, but if I did I would have done the same as Vmenkov is doing now. —Politizer talk/contribs 07:20, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merging from Agriculture in the People's Republic of China?

[edit]

Until recently I did not even completely realize that we've got two separate articles. I've noticed it when I was looking in one of the articles for an edit that I thought I had done there earlier... until I realized that I had done it in the other one.

I suppose the rationale for having two articles was to have Agriculture in the People's Republic of China talk about agriculture in today's PRC and its history since 1949, while the other would also somehow cover Taiwan (it doesn't, and there isn't that much on agriculture in the Economy of Taiwan article either), Agriculture and aquaculture in Hong Kong, Macau (not that much agriculture in the latter, though...), and the pre-1949 history (but we have a separate article on the history anyway). So the current situation is that we've pretty much got duplication: different people talking about the same things in two articles, in different words and in somewhat different order. In my view, having two articles (none of which is a disambig page) will keep resulting in similar editors' and readers' confusion - mostly because there isn't all that much to say in Agriculture in China that won't also fit in Agriculture in the People's Republic of China.

We can consider at least two possible reorganization options:

  1. Move most of the content into Agriculture in the People's Republic of China, keeping Agriculture in China as a sort of a disambiguation pages, containing just links into Agriculture in the People's Republic of China, Agriculture in Taiwan, whatever HK/Macau pages, and some kind of history page.
  2. Fully merge Agriculture in the People's Republic of China into Agriculture in China; the latter article would also contain small sections on pre- and post-1949 history, Taiwan, HK, Macau, with an appropriate {{more|Specialized article}} tag in each one.

Vmenkov (talk) 07:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I support option #2. It's crazy that this has gone on for over a year now. I noticed when someone created the History of agriculture in the People's Republic of China article (which was just a big copy-paste from a website), but I didn't catch the Agriculture of People's Republic page. Honestly, I don't know what the politically-correct thing to do is, but I think that keeping this article's title will be pretty straightforward to most people, especially since as you said, Taiwan doesn't have much agriculture. johnpseudo 14:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I also support #2. No matter what we do people will try to turn it into a political battle, but in any case, #2 is best for the encyclopaedia, and that's what matters. —Politizer talk/contribs 15:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why we should be careful about using large tables

[edit]

Even though wikipedia is not paper, we have to limit the size of articles in order to create material that effectively informs our readers in a limited amount of time. A page-long table that effectively just says "China is the largest producer of a lot of things" is a waste of space. It's not important for the general "Agriculture in China" article to note specifically which year and by what amounts China was able to achieve the "largest producer" role for every specific agricultural product. If anything, we need to simply improve and elaborate on the table that is already there, and focus solely on the top 10-15 products that China produces. If we can't fit all of the information that we want to fit into a small table, then we have to find some way to categorize and break down the information into smaller charts. johnpseudo 17:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This table looks like little more than boasting to me, since it lists only times that China was the "largest" producer, rather than using any objective quantitative inclusion criteria. Why should "largest" producer one year be included, and "second largest" producer another not be? From a numbers standpoint, the difference between the two might be very small. The difference is just in bragging rights. Coming from the country that's eagerly building the largest dam in the world and that rushed to put a man in space when basic needs of a large portion of the population are still not met, it's no surprise that bragging rights seem to be playing a big role in this table. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 19:56, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree.johnpseudo 23:20, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Although accounting for only 10 percent of arable land worldwide, it produces food for 20 percent of the world's population." - This is a very misleading statement.

[edit]

First of all, there is no citation. Furthermore, this statement is misleading to the reader. Arable land is land that is or could be used to grow food crops. It is not land that IS being used. The article further on down mentions that since the year 2000, China has been a net importer of grain. In addition to all the imports and exports of food, as well as domestic fishing, claiming that China's agriculture feeds 20% of the world's population seems impossible to verify. A similar statement for Russia would be "Although account for as much as 10 percent of arable land worldwide, it only produces food for 2% of the world's population." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.231.170.236 (talk) 18:02, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Agriculture in China. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:40, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Agriculture in China/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article is a joke. With only one citation for the over 100 stats and facts it presents.

Last edited at 18:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 06:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Agriculture in China. 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:

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) 21:08, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Agriculture in China. 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:

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) 04:39, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Agriculture in China. 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:

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) 00:55, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First two sentences

[edit]

The first two sentences of this article seem like a joke. Any way to fix it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hwu02 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 200 - Thu

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 September 2022 and 8 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): VenusL (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by VenusL (talk) 11:56, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Agriculture_in_China&oldid=1222518208"