Talk:Urban agriculture

message: I am editing this article for a city planning class and would appreciate feedback before I make edits and additions to the article:
• adding content about a local food movement in the United States in response to a rise in chemical processing in food, which encourages a larger push towards urban agriculture 
• adding a citation for the section about Woodrow Wilson asking Americans to grow food
• adding content about urban agriculture in Australia
• adding more information about hydroponic farming in New York City
• adding a reference to the NYC Mayor's Office of Food Policy and their urban agriculture initiatives/programs  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kpanczner1 (talk • contribs) 16:52, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed edits and additions 

message: Where does the 95%/95% statistic come from under 'Energy Efficiency'?  There is no reference, and that scenario is not even theoretically possible if we wish to maintain our low food prices.  While it is true that it costs less to transport food produced near the consumption center, those costs are most often passed back to the producer, not to the consumer.  Please either provide clear and scientifically valid references or do not include this information. ScottK 18:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not totally sure that the stat is correct. I think if it is true though, I think they mean imported/exported from state to state; the US international trade is part of the 95% but not the whole of it. For instance most oranges eaten in Colorado have travelled over 1500 miles from either CA or FL, and most of the oranges  grown in FL and CA are exported to different states/regions of the nations. So I think it means 95% of food is not from the vicinity in which it is being eaten/where it was grown.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.69.2.20 (talk) 23:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  based on the above, I have removed the statement from the article.DGG (talk) 01:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What?!?! 

message: Uncle g, the two links you have just added arent external links. They are references and should be used to support the article somewhere appropriate. DGG (talk) 06:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: links vs refs

message: A group of graduate students from The Newschool University are working on updating the references and balancing the article. We will take down the reference tag once done, The neutrality seems to stem from the "forced labor" and sustained labor force of urban agriculture? Not sure if it is still relevant? We will move the NPOV to this section and to the end of the article. --(talk) 18:07, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Unreferenced article

message: I think the links should remain in the article for a number of reasons.  First, for students or activists who may want to start an organic farm, it is nice to go to Wikipedia and have the links referenced there.  It saves hours of searching for this information (that somebody has already graciously done for the purposes of providing more information - isn't that the purpose of wikipedia?).  Second, the links page is not that long and if somebody wants to skip that section, all they need to do is click the pertinent sections they are interested in from the Contents box.  Third, if these links are deleted, it feels like certain wiki editors are trying to squelch the very idea of urban agriculture.  This is a growing movement around the globe, and rather than suppress this information, we need to provide examples of where it is happening.  Those are my reasons why I believe that all of the links now included under in hidden comments should revert back to the External links section.  Blueelectricstorm (talk) 18:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Keep the links

message: Hello everyone! My name is Antonino and I'm running an informative/educational blog mainly focussed on Green Roofs, Rooftop Gardens, Urban Farming and more. I wish to ask you to consider whether a link to my blog should be inserted in this cathegory of Urban agricolture. My site is at http://vision4ourcities.wordpress.com/ Thank you very much!Agiglio (talk) 07:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: According to WP:EL, we're not supposed to include links to people's blogs. - MrOllie (talk) 11:55, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Link Consideration

message: Don't really see what is wrong with this. Perhaps the penultimate bullet with reference to subsidized industrial agriculture, but otherwise it is a sensible list of difficulties, to which could be added "praedial larceny" Agrimarketing (talk) 14:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm deleting the POV-section template, at is appears to be left over from a "dispute" that was settled years ago. --Otterfan (talk) 15:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  difficulties with urban agriculture neutrality disputed 

message: rooftop farming and underground farming should be discussed in article; see http://www.cityfarmer.info/tokyo-rooftop-and-underground-urban-farming-lures-young-japanese-office-workers/  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.243.182.55 (talk) 08:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rooftop and underground farming

message: foodsecurity.org is no longer a community food site.  It has been taken over by a spammer using it to sell Garcinia Cambogia, which has nothing to do with this wikipedia page.  They are currently reference #13^ "Community Food Coalition". Foodsecurity.org.  I am removing that link, and explaining here why it is being removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.198.77.144 (talk) 12:01, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:53, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing a link 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Urban agriculture. 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/20070716000637/http://www.sarep.ucdavis.edu:80/newsltr/v7n3/sa-10.htm to http://www.sarep.ucdavis.edu/newsltr/v7n3/sa-10.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071218171756/http://www.idrc.ca:80/fr/ev-2490-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html to http://www.idrc.ca/fr/ev-2490-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html#gender%20and%20land
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080416053328/http://english.sz.gov.cn:80/economy/200708/t20070824_229911.htm to http://english.sz.gov.cn/economy/200708/t20070824_229911.htm
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 06:33, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Since agriculture in peri-urban regions tends to have unique characteristics from urban agriculture, I added an article about it and am inserting a link to that page by adding to a sentence in the first paragraph in this article. Happy to receive feedback on this move and the content of the peri-urban agriculture article. Thanks! Madfs (talk) 04:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peri-Urban Agriculture 

message: This article is mainly about outdoor growing in an urban environment. However, the indoor growing method isn't mentioned much here, despite that it is actually a more effective (and perhaps even more cost-effective?) method to grow crops in an urban environment, since plants can be stacked up, and can even grow quicker than outdoors (well, depending on the crop grown, so not always). PlantLab has been a pretty popular example of a company pioneering this, and lately, there are other companies following their footsteps (i.e. Urban Crops, PlantyFood, Click & Grow, ...)
So, perhaps the use of growrooms can be mentioned on the article ?
Also, can someone look into whether any company is actually using natural lighting options instead of lamps ? Should be much more cost-effective and more ecological. An example is the Parans system.
KVDP (talk) 09:19, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that there could be more content on indoor growing, but we need independent refs covering the various products / methods. We already have articles on Gotham Greens and Lufa Farms which run successful rooftop greenhouses, and these could be given more coverage here. As greenhouses, these both use natural light. Dialectric (talk) 16:22, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Growrooms

message: Regarding sources, I tested a few (probably up until #50 or so) and many did not work which is not helpful when people use this as a source to find other information. Some of the source links that did not work are 2, 4, 8, 9, 11, 17, 24, 26, 30, 43, and 50.
There are a few quotes that are a bit too long specifically in the "resource and economic" and "environmental" perspectives sections. These quotes seem to violate Wikipedia's plagiarism rules since I believe they could easily be explained in one's own words and do not need to be added. I have also seen a mixture of block quotes and non-block quotes with seemingly no reason as to why they are each way. I am unsure if the same rules that apply to essays for block quotes are supposed to apply to these articles (generally longer than 4 lines) or if it is on a basis of importance. I have a feeling the first would apply, which would cause need for some changes to be made so that these rules are followed and that the article is more cohesive. 
In regards to actual content, there is a paragraph at the end of the history section that is entirely an opinion and takes a very firm stance of the issue and should be taken out entirely. I think that those thoughts can be used in the perspective section or benefits, since those are showing different opinions on the matter, but no opinion should be in the history section. 
I also believe that the organization of the article should be altered a bit. It seems like it would be beneficial to have the benefits and trade-offs sections before the implementation, especially considering the length of the implementation section. 
Pdenmark (talk) 05:47, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Critque 

message: Formal request has been received to merge: City farm into Urban agriculture; dated: May 2017. Proposer's Rationale: Urban agriculture is a more comprehensive article on the same subject. "City farm" is not a notable or distinct category within urban ag. . Discuss here. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 16:46, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: After reading this article and seeing the urban agriculture article - I have to say that I am rather surprised about this merge proposal. To my view the topics mainly share the word "urban" in the title and I cannot see other overlap that warrants merger. I also do not see why this would be a subsection of urban agriculture as for Urban fields it purely recreational use (ie non agricultural) is part of the definition, while urban agriculture includes "non field" production systems (e.g. mushroom cultivation in the basement of an abandoned swimming pool). Arnoutf (talk) 13:48, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  The urban field article is not based on any sources and is an opinion/perspective/idea on what 'urban field' means. Rather in urban planning, city administration practice there is no common definition of urban field. In this context generally, urban field is synonymous with urban agriculture and of which neither are differentiated by ownership, use, or purpose. Take what you see with a grain of salt. There are a lot of pop culture ideas, movements, suggested approaches in urbanity. As an example here http://members.chello.nl/smetaal/ufdf.htm is a very different definition of an urban field. Here is another http://www.fieldurbanism.com/changing-chinese-cities-1/. These aren't 'accepted' definitions, however, and urban planners in practice do not reference urban fields except where they relate to agriculture, or, at times drainage.  Randomeditor1000 (talk) 22:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

text: So, we have an article which has contained no references to support it for more than ten years. We can argue about what "urban field" means because nobody really has a clue. It can mean one thing to one person and one thing to another, as has been pointed out above. One thing's for sure, it's got nothing to do with urban agriculture from the scant sources I've managed to find which barely makes the term even notable (Urban field = Urban area). In my view, this article is WP:OR which should have been PRODed long ago. Blank the page and create a WP:REDIRECT to Urbanism. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:48, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

text: I agree to the above suggestion. Let's redirect to Urbanism. RenZutↂ 15:02, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

text: do not merge Brock-brac (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger discussion

message: ;Merger proposal
Formal request has been received to merge the article Urban field into Urban agriculture; dated: July 2017. Proposer's Rationale: topic is a sub-section of latter article. Discuss here.  Richard3120 (talk) 21:00, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: After reading this article and seeing the urban agriculture article - I have to say that I am rather surprised about this merge proposal. To my view the topics mainly share the word "urban" in the title and I cannot see other overlap that warrants merger. I also do not see why this would be a subsection of urban agriculture as for Urban fields it purely recreational use (ie non agricultural) is part of the definition, while urban agriculture includes "non field" production systems (e.g. mushroom cultivation in the basement of an abandoned swimming pool). Arnoutf (talk) 13:48, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  The urban field article is not based on any sources and is an opinion/perspective/idea on what 'urban field' means. Rather in urban planning, city administration practice there is no common definition of urban field. In this context generally, urban field is synonymous with urban agriculture and of which neither are differentiated by ownership, use, or purpose. Take what you see with a grain of salt. There are a lot of pop culture ideas, movements, suggested approaches in urbanity. As an example here http://members.chello.nl/smetaal/ufdf.htm is a very different definition of an urban field. Here is another http://www.fieldurbanism.com/changing-chinese-cities-1/. These aren't 'accepted' definitions, however, and urban planners in practice do not reference urban fields except where they relate to agriculture, or, at times drainage.  Randomeditor1000 (talk) 22:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

text: So, we have an article which has contained no references to support it for more than ten years. We can argue about what "urban field" means because nobody really has a clue. It can mean one thing to one person and one thing to another, as has been pointed out above. One thing's for sure, it's got nothing to do with urban agriculture from the scant sources I've managed to find which barely makes the term even notable (Urban field = Urban area). In my view, this article is WP:OR which should have been PRODed long ago. Blank the page and create a WP:REDIRECT to Urbanism. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:48, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

text: I agree to the above suggestion. Let's redirect to Urbanism. RenZutↂ 15:02, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

text: do not merge Brock-brac (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: from source page

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Urban agriculture. 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/20070927195253/http://www.ruaf.org/system/files?file=Periurban%20Agriculture%20Development%20in%20China.pdf to http://www.ruaf.org/system/files?file=Periurban%20Agriculture%20Development%20in%20China.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160207064950/http://www.cityslickerfarms.org/mission-and-history to http://www.cityslickerfarms.org/mission-and-history
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060615180037/http://efcf.vgc.be/ to http://efcf.vgc.be/
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) 13:43, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Just browsing and o.m.g. what has happened here? The intro is a fuzzy mess and fails to reflect the full article, and the full article has edits going back years that are inaccurate, garbled, possibly sneaky vandalism. Many articles improve over time, but some go to rot and ruin, including this one. 
*INTRO 
From the first intro paragraph I removed one biased-opinion self-promoting quote but gave it a new section -- Greenhouses and indoor growing, requested last year. Turms out it was basically SPAM that showed up in several articles discussed here and now been deleted, so Greenhouses may still have to wait. 
The second intro paragraph speaks of the "global north" and "developing south". Context please! North where, south where? 
*HISTORY
The opening sentence in 'History made little sense and the paragraph is artless. Looking at the history (of History) and - Ahha! - yes, the edits are a mix of poor editing, vandalism, and inertia. 
:ORIGINAL (a list - March 2008): Semi-Desert towns of Persia — Oases were fed through aqueducts that carried mountain water to support intensive food production based on wastes from the communities themselvesVijoen, Andre, et al. 2005, Continous Productive Urban Landscapes. Architectural Press, Burlington MA 2005.  
:AFTER 6 MONTHS (September 2008): The semi-desert towns of Persia were oases fed through aqueducts that carried mountain water to support intensive food production. In addition, community wastes were used to feed this urban farming.
:AFTER ONE YEAR (MARCH 2009): Community wastes were used in ancient Persia to feed urban farming. 
:AFTER LESS THAN FOUR YEARS (October 2011): Community wastes were used in ancient Egypt to feed urban farming.  (NOTE: This MAY BE vandalism.)
:NOW: Community wastes were used in ancient Egypt to feed urban farming.
This article needs some consistent editing to chip away at these and more problems.  I'll see what I can do. GeeBee60 (talk) 00:23, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Have made a couple of edits based on above concerns, after waiting a few weeks w/ no response. GeeBee60 (talk) 15:53, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is a subtle mess 

message: I looked for a suitable replacement for the removed borderline-promotional image, but no luck. Anyone has a good idea for an image that illustrates the wider historical perspective of this topic? Ideally it should directly relate to one of the aspects discussed in the section - a historical image or at least a modern image with some historical relevance would be nice there. GermanJoe (talk) 18:26, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: While photo you deleted does not fit 'History' - agree - I've reinserted it into 'Implementation'. Photo is minimally promotional, and one of very few that is not USA or Europe. For 'History' I found a 95 year old photo in NYC that is adequate for now, though to make it "fit" I rephrased a sentence. (Expect to see elsewhere in the article some more photos that I found.) GeeBee60 (talk) 16:49, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice find, thank you. No problems with having the previous image in a different context (I have toned down the PR speak though). GermanJoe (talk) 17:18, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  New image for "history"? 

message: Houses with gardens, as well as, chickens and cows, were commonplace in urban areas of colonial America and in Europe, ignoramuses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.28.145.17  (talk) 01:59, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Golly gosh sure do appreciate such edifying insights. Would you help us all out by sharing your citations? GeeBee60 (talk) 13:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commonplace in colonial America, etc 

message: It is important to this page that we include more countries' general projects on the page because urban agriculture is expanding aroung the world. I am going to start choosing random countries and researching the general development of urban agriculture and include a couple major projects within that country if anybody would like to join me.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plebeian monk (talk • contribs) 19:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  General knowledge about countries 

message: — Assignment last updated by Lelomeli (talk) 22:47, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Tech Writing for Agriculture

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Rooftop farm at the Essex (65787p).jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for April 20, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-04-20. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! --Ahecht (TALKPAGE) 21:20, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD 

message: Hi all, apologies for the commentless edit. Short description which was only appearing on the mobile app had the short description as "Consumption of Feces," presumably vandalism. I changed it to "Production of food in an Urban setting," which could probably be better phrased if anyone has the gumption. Mich8889 (talk) 19:13, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small edit 

message: I don't have a particular axe to grind here, but the contents box makes this article's coverage look a lot more balanced than it is. The sections called "Perspectives" and "Impact" might as well be merged with the one called "Benefits," as that's all they cover. The "Trade-offs" section, demoted to the end of a massive article, is carrying way to much weight. The content of the article isn't terrible and I'm not saying the positive stuff should be deleted, but both benefits and drawbacks should be covered early on before delving into excessive detail, and we need more detailed discussion of the drawbacks that have only bullet pointed in the current article. small jars tc 17:44, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Another complaint: what are we counting as agriculture for the purposes of this article? As I understand it that requires a focus on large-scale cultivation of staples. Small scale cultivation of various non-staple vegetables is just gardening, and (sub)urban gardening does not seem to be notably different from rural gardening, at least in as much as limited space is a common feature. small jars tc 01:39, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Your understanding is incorrect. Agriculture is, definitionally, the farming of domesticated species; it follows that urban agriculture is the farming of domesticated species in an urban environment, and nothing more. Don't overcomplicate things. CarollyK (talk) 00:34, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad structure and bias 

message: I have tagged a section as disputed, since it seems to be suggesting that plants being grown to remove toxic material from the soil are also able to be used for food (which the presence of it in this article suggests). If the plants can remove toxins from the soil, those toxins have to go somewhere. Suggestions that the plants can convert arsenic, mercury and uranium to harmless forms are utterly ridiculous, as all these elements are quite toxic, and their compounds do not usually decrease the danger that these pose (often, they make it far worse). Either the section doesn't belong in this article (as the topic is about plants grown for food, not urban horticulture in general), or the reason why food from plants grown to remove toxic waste from soil would not be itself toxic. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 08:26, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  You do have a point - although organic toxins might be metabolised by plants this is obviously not the case for heavy metals. This should be carefully considered by someone who knows more of it then me. Arnoutf (talk) 16:59, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phytoremediation content 

message: — Assignment last updated by Warmedforbs (talk) 01:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Applied Plant Ecology Winter 2024

message: I am confused how phytoremdiation by urban agriculture is a benefit, as phytoextraction of heavy metals means that the plants uptake them, and thus the plants will have elevated levels of these toxins which they will pass on to consumers. This is the exact opposite of what one wants in agriculture. In fact, it is surprising that there is no mention anywhere of the downsides of agriculture in higher pollution areas such as cities. Jevandezande (talk) 21:40, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phytoremediation 

message: — Assignment last updated by Joshuapak11 (talk) 21:24, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Global Poverty and Practice