Talk:Slow Food

message: In case anyone is wondering, or willing to debate my most recent edit, The UK Slow Food foundation was created recently, and here is a link to the Sloweb article about Slow Food UK.  This article comes from Google, but the publication date is December, hence the wording of my editing.  I'll change my diction on new years eve, I promise!
--Civilcasualty 18:16, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Judging by this article in The Guardian from February of this year, it was swiftly torn down and rebuilt. The article does include the useful fact that, at least as of February 2009, Slow Food UK had 2,200 subscriptions (at £35 a pop, which means it raised £77,000 assuming that all of the subscriptions were paid and not e.g. promotional or honorary, and furthermore the article doesn't say whether the subscriptions are one-time, annual, monthly, etc, although it strongly implies that they are annual). -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 12:20, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have deleted most of this section, as the contents was 5 years out-of-date.
I will update numbers when I hear back from SF UK.Archolman User talk:Archolman 19:29, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slow Food UK 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Slow Science which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 01:30, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: This lead of the article could be longer and use citations – four factual statements are made in it but without any reference. They are also paraphrased from the “about us” section of the Slow Food organisation website. The cited source, for example in reference 1. and 2., is often the official website of the movement, which may not be a reliable source. This is especially true considering that the topic should address the movement as a bigger picture itself rather than the “Slow Food” organisation. There are several claims that still require citations, particularly statements like “As of 2013, Slow Food USA has a membership of roughly 12,000, down from over 30,000 in 2008” that have statistics in them. The “Critcisms” section, although well-cited, needs more diverse points of view because it currently includes only one voice. 
Hashmita7 (talk) 04:58, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Housekeeping issues 

message: Why did the amount of Slow Food chapters decrease from 2011 to now? Were the Slow Food chapters unsuccessful in getting people to see the benefits of a more fresh and healthy diet? Was there not enough funding for the existing slow food chapters? (LOL190 (talk) 05:58, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: May be it was because they were successful in convincing people (and businesses), so their campaign became less pressing? There's certainly been a rise in 'Farmers Markets' and supermarkets have become more wily in offering a wider variety of foods. Interesting question all the same. Sionk (talk) 11:13, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

text: Might I suggest you look on the organisation's website for some of these answers? It would seem the sensible place to start. Sionk (talk) 23:06, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions About Slow Food 

message: This article did a good job at providing background knowledge and information on this subject.  Splitting it up by country and highlighting the differences was good because it showed that each country is different.  The socioeconomic section was a bit small, and I think there could be a lot more information about how this movement is viewed amongst the population as well as how it affects people.  This movement could have several social implications and these should be looked into and could possibility be worth noting.  Someone should also look at updating the sources.  Several that I clicked on aren't there anymore saying "page not found".  It also seems that out of what sources are working, most of them are from a slow food official webpage so the information could be biased and have an angle favoring slow food. Dz14 (talk) 18:07, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social implications/sources 

message: One section of the article that I found distracting was the piece on the past publicity efforts of Slow Food. I felt that the information was not as pertinent to the article.  
Another section that I thought could be expanded upon was the objectives. I appreciated that all the objectives of the movement were stated but I felt that they could all be more in depth instead of a single sentence. 
Pipertownsend (talk) 05:29, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Critiques  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Slow Food. 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/20160708061848/http://www.wir-haben-es-satt.de/start/netzwerk/traegerinnen/ to http://www.wir-haben-es-satt.de/start/netzwerk/traegerinnen/
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) 09:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Looking for some feedback on whether it would be appropriate to categorize this article under :Category:Italian cuisine. -- œ™ 06:35, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It's n international phenomena/movement/organisation, so "Italian" doesn't fit Sionk (talk) 04:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:Italian cuisine]]?

message: — Assignment last updated by JayHTCVPN (talk) 04:34, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 200 - Thu