Talk:International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants

message: I'm creating an encyclopedic entry for UPOV for my Biology and Society Class at Arizona State University. Our class work is all done via wiki. After creating this entry for my class, I'd like to come back here and edit this entry. It'd be my first major wikipedia edit - I'm confident in my knowledge but not in my skill. Anyone want to object? Ceramufary 18:32, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. You can go for it! Please be sure to cite your sources. Thanks. --Edcolins 18:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: CAFTA (Ch15, Sxn 5(a)) requires Costa Rica to have adopted into UPOV by June 2007- does anybody know if this happened?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.140.153.194 (talk) 16:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently, it hasn't. See . --Edcolins (talk) 19:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Costa Rica? 

message: * http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=plant+breeding+nomenclature&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdts=5&hl=en
--222.67.211.222 (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  FYI....info about the nomenclature from [[Google scholar]] and others 

message: I'm thinking of deleting the following sentence, as POV.  "In addition, UPOV systematically uses "he" "his" to refer to breeders, ignoring the role of women in many countries and many cultures in sharing knowledge and breeding new varieties. "  Women in many cultures do everything (or almost everything?) that men do.  English has no commonly used common pronoun.  According to one view, it is sexist, discriminatory and demeaning to use the masculine pronoun to refer to people of either sex: according to another, this is standard practice, well understood and seriously resented only by those who have no sense of proportion.  It is not my purpose to take sides in this controversy, but only to point out that it exists. UPOV apparently inclines more to the second view, and maybe they are open to criticism for that reason - but that is POV.  Perhaps someone could supply a reference to a criticism of this kind?  Then it would not be mere editorialising. Twr57 (talk) 12:02, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  (U)POV? 

message: I've tagged the section in question. It presents both sides, but it also reads much like an informative essay, rather than an encyclopedic entry.
Dracosphinx (talk) 01:45, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Development and public interest concerns 

message: link 19. dead, should be http://www.quno.org/sites/default/files/resources/UPOV%2Bstudy%2Bby%2BQUNO_English.pdf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.114.2.58 (talk) 15:39, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link dead 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100326193850/http://www.upov.int:80/export/sites/upov/en/news/pressroom/pdf/pr77.pdf to http://www.upov.int/export/sites/upov/en/news/pressroom/pdf/pr77.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060526220544/http://www.upov.int:80/en/about/pdf/cbd_respons_oct_31_2005.pdf to http://www.upov.int/en/about/pdf/cbd_respons_oct_31_2005.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110101060535/http://www.inwent.org/ez/articles/169301/index.en.shtml to http://www.inwent.org/ez/articles/169301/index.en.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:45, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110110100443/http://upov.int/export/sites/upov/en/about/members/pdf/pub423.pdf to http://www.upov.int/export/sites/upov/en/about/members/pdf/pub423.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110101144917/http://www.inwent.org/ez/articles/169276/index.en.shtml to http://www.inwent.org/ez/articles/169276/index.en.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110110225344/http://www.evb.ch:80/en/p25018055.html to http://www.evb.ch/en/p25018055.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:44, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060821220927/http://www.upov.int/en/publications/conventions/1991/act1991.htm to http://www.upov.int/en/publications/conventions/1991/act1991.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051218170343/http://www.upov.int/en/about/upov_system.htm to http://www.upov.int/en/about/upov_system.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.upov.int/en/documents/Symposium2003/intro_index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111026150614/http://www2.hawaii.edu/~kent/AFRICAS%20FOOD%20SECURITY%20UNDER%20GLOBALIZATION.pdf to http://www2.hawaii.edu/~kent/AFRICAS%20FOOD%20SECURITY%20UNDER%20GLOBALIZATION.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120323225911/http://www.quno.org/geneva/pdf/economic/Issues/UPOV%20study%20by%20QUNO_English.pdf to http://www.quno.org/geneva/pdf/economic/Issues/UPOV%20study%20by%20QUNO_English.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:36, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I am planning to work on this article. As this is a topic I am working on, I am currently studying quite a few documents on UPOV and I think it would be worth it to improve this article to make it more informative and readable. 
Here some revision I would suggest: 
Section Member States: I would suggest to remove the table as it takes a lot of space and might not be of major intrest for most readers. Furthermore, this table is also available on UPOV's website, and I don't see the point of replicating it on Wikipedia but would rahter refer to UPOV's site. Instead I would update and enlarge the text in this section to give some general information on which goups of states joined in what period.
I suggest to insert a new section on the different acts of UPOV, in particular the ones that are still in force (UPOV78 and UPOV91), showing the differences and the rules who can adhere to which act. 
Section Genetically Modified Plants: I would remove this section. In most cases IP of GMOs is protected through patents rather than plant variety protection. Therefore this is not very relevant. Instead, the differences between plant variety protection and patents could be mentioned somewhere. 
Section Critics and public interest concerns: This section should also be improved. As the text is now, it seems that François Meienberg has one opinion and Rolf Jördens has another. However, by now there are quite a lot of studies - critical ones but also such that have been comissioned by UPOV. This evidence sould be discussed here, rahter than opinions. 
This is one of the first Wikipedia articles I work on. So, I count on your understanding and hope for your help, if I'm not following all the rules. Also, as I am not a native speaker, linguistic corrections are welcome.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barolome (talk • contribs) 08:46, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planning to do some revisions 

message: I am done with the part Members/Membership. The map of member countries would need updating. Would be great if somebody would take care of that. I would suggest to differentiate between members that are bound to UPOV 1991 und such that are bound to UPOV 1987.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Barolome (talk • contribs) 10:27, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map of Members 

message: I find this section little relevant: Typically GMO's are protected by patents rather than plant variety protection. The section only cites some discussions that were held a long time ago without conrete decision. Therefore I consider deleting this section. 
Instead, it could be interesting to add a section on patents on plants and their relation to PVP. 
--Barolome (talk) 06:40, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove Section UPOV and GMO