Talk:Norman Borlaug/Archive 1

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

Genetically modified

The article says:

His efforts in the 1960s to introduce genetically-modified seeds...


Is "genetically-modifed" the correct word to use here? I don't think that the term as commonly understood applies to the techniques that Borlaug used.


No it is incorrect. My grandfather worked in seed corn hybridization at Iowa State. Hybrid corn is not GM, which refers to actual genetic manipulation by laboratory techniques, not cross-breeding. -- Decumanus 18:28, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
On a note here, while green revolution wheats were crossbred, they were not hybrid -- cowsandmilk 22:14, 19 Dec 2004

Recent improvement of article

Stunning. Congrats & warmfuzzies. You know who you are. –Hajor 22:55, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Throughs on the article

To-do for yield impact section

  • What year did India become self-sufficient for food production? 1974 for all cereals
  • When were they introdued to China and Latin America, how much impact did the varieties have there?
  • Should it discuss the no green revolution scenario pdf? Or is that better material for the Green Revolution article?
    • Is this denying that there was a Green Revolution, or saying that we don't need another one in the future? --brian0918™
      • They are statistical estimates of what the world would be like today (poverty, hunger etc.) if there wasn't a green revolution.--nixie 06:50, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Some more general additions

  • Were semi-dwarf varieties necessary to introduce two cropping cycles a year?
    • I think the point of the double seasons was to more quickly create these useful varieties. I'll see what else I can find. --brian0918™ 03:27, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Rice research, Bourlag didn't do any, (fascinating that the dwarf varieties both relied on mutations in the same hormonal pathway) should probably be in the Green Revolution Article.
  • Should there be a more extended summary of the Green Revolution in the Effect of his work section (I think this section should be remaned, but I can't think what to) Rice information could also go here? --nixie 03:10, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I'll look at some of these things. I definitely think some of the content needs rearranged and the headers should be redone (and there should be more headers). --brian0918™ 03:27, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've had a go at a reorganisation, I've commented out a few bits and pieces that could move to the general article, the Green Revolution section could use a little expansion. I'll keep working on the fact checking.--nixie 06:49, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Needs a little fix-up.

The second paragraph of Borlaug and the Green Revolution has an incomplete first sentence. I don't quite know what the author was intending to say there.

Also, the part about how wheat had to be stored in the schools in India is duplicated and should be pared down to just one mention of it.

Honors and recognition / Quote

The naming of a street after him in Cd Obregón was described as "especially satisfying" -- unless that's a direct quote, it sounded rather excessive in light of the string of other honors below. I had a shot at rewording it.

I physically cringed the first time I read the quote from Penn and Teller -- the reference to Sagan and his billions is neat, but the words "And most of them were a different race from him" say more about Penn Jillette than about Borlaug. Would replacing that line with ellipsis dots be appropriate?

The World Peace Window in Minneapolis sounded like an impressive piece of art, so I searched for it. [1] Oh well. Nice idea, though. I suppose stained glass isn't the easiest medium to work in. –Hajor 17:03, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • The "especially satisfying" is from the Nobel prize site's biography of him. It meant that having that street named after him was personally satisfying to him, more-so than the other honors, since he doesn't put much stock in all these big awards he gets. I've taken out that part of the Penn and Teller quote. I understand what Penn was trying to get at, and I agree with him, but understand that it's more a reflection of Penn than Borlaug. If widespread famine had been going on in the US as well, Borlaug would've made it a primary target. I think he basically made a list of the places that were in the worst condition and could be helped the most by his work, and just started packing his bags. --brian0918™ 17:28, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OK. Do you want to add "which he described as 'especially satisfying'" or words to that effect, or can it be left as it is? (From what I can see on the Obregón street map in my road atlas -- which, unfortunately, spells it "Dr. Norman Bourlong" -- it's a pretty big street: major N-S avenue leading into the downtown area.) And, IMHO, good call on the P&T quotation. –Hajor 17:45, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • I clarified the street sentence. Can you find a map of the city online anywhere? What's the exact name of the street as it appears on your map? --brian0918™ 19:03, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What I've got is a tiny through-route map of the city that appears in the back pages of a road atlas covering the whole country; it just labels it "Dr. Norman Bourlong". On line, there's one here (not very good) and a pictorial one here. Both seem to indicate the name changes to "5 de febrero" when it hits the south rim city centre. The second one labels it "C. Norman E. Borlaug", which indicates that it's a "calle" (street), not an "avenida". (The first map spells it Borlaung, too -- must be very common for it be spelled wrong by the locals. ) –Hajor 19:32, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC) PS: Regarding the spelling, this edit is probably telling, too.)

  • I think it's a common misspelling. I found some Spanish-language journal articles that spell it wrong, as well as several English ones. Google definitely needs to incorporate Soundex searching. --brian0918™ 19:37, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fiddly details

A couple of quick comments with a view to the WP:FA drive. –Hajor 30 June 2005 19:16 (UTC)

  1. Biography info-box: having an empty space awaiting the date of Dr Norman's demise is ghoulish. Is there a separate version of that template for people who are not yet dead? Should one be created?
    • I thought the same thing when I first implemented it. I couldn't find an alternative, but believe one should be created. --brian0918™ 30 June 2005 19:41 (UTC)
      • I agree. --nixie 30 June 2005 23:25 (UTC)
        • Consciously on my pending list, then, unless someone else does it / offers an alternative. –Hajor
        • Done. Swapped for a non-template version without date of death. And, when push came to shove, I remmed out the date of birth, too -- I thought it looked tidier like that: nice big pic with a solid title, but without biographical pretensions. If you don't agree, it's trivial to re-include. All three versions can be seen on my user sandbox. –Hajor 1 July 2005 13:13 (UTC)
  2. Footnotes: Some come before the punctuation[1]; others, after.[2] I like the footnotes-after-stops style better, but that's not important: consistency is. (Having the footnote calls in superscript also makes a right pig's ear of line spacing, but that's a defect of the footnote template, not this article. Still a shame, though.)
    • I think the rule for that is that if the source is for the whole paragraph, and appears at the end of the paragraph, then the footnote comes after the stop, but if the source is for a sentence in the paragraph, the footnote is before the stop. --brian0918™ 30 June 2005 19:41 (UTC)
      • I have to confess that's not a guideline I've ever heard. If you don't mind, I'll ask the typography mavens on the Manual of Style. –Hajor 30 June 2005 23:45 (UTC)
        • Finally, fwiw, some comments here. –Hajor 16:11, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  3. Second Kashmir War -- found the redirect for that
  4. El Batán and Yaqui Valley -- I assume those are the names of the research stations / estates themselves, not of any surrounding towns or villages, so they're unlikely to get articles. De-link? Although someone might do a Río Yaqui / River Yaqui article at some point, the redirect wouldn't really be appropriate.
  5. Triticale: that was quite the buzzword at one point in the 1960s, and Borlaug speaks of it in his Nobel speech; his Encyclopaedia Brit. article also ties it in with his time at CIMMYT. No mention of it in this article however (and the Triticale article itself could use some TLC).
    • I had a couple sentences on it in there, but couldn't find any additional info besides from the Nobel bio (I didn't check his lecture), so I took it out since I didn't know where to place it in the timeframe (the Nobel bio said it's his current work, but how current is the bio?). If you can find additional info, please re-add the content. --brian0918™ 30 June 2005 19:41 (UTC)
      • I've always assumed that the Nobel bios are contemporary with the prizes -- hence, 35 yrs out of date. I noticed you added a link this p.m. Maybe I'll get inspired to do some reading round the subject, expand Triticale and tie in what I find with this article. Unless someone more expert in the field (nixie?) feels like beating me to it. –Hajor
        • I'm unsure how involved in triticale research Borlaug was, the Britannica bio which says He also created a wheat-rye hybrid known as triticale is almost certainly misleading if not incorrect. The CIMMYT was invloved in triticale research and Borlaug helped publicise their reseach [2] he mentions it in his Nobel lecture etc, but from my reading around the subject he does not seem to have done significant breeding with triticale himself.--nixie 1 July 2005 00:13 (UTC)
          • From my (scant) understanding of the case, the Britannica is incorrect on that one. What CIMMYT did in the 60s was produce more viable varieties of something going back to the previous century and, as you say, it doesn't appear Borlaug was directly involved (other than as "director of the center"). I'm happy just as long as triticale's linked somewhere. –Hajor 1 July 2005 12:55 (UTC)
  6. Billion lives, I've searched everywhere for the source of this number, the best I can come up (my hypothesis) is that is is a figure inferred from the population increases over the course of the Green Revolution, someone said it or wrote it and it has become like an urban legend. I've emailed the Heritage Foundation to see if they know the origin of the phrase. --nixie 30 June 2005 23:25 (UTC)
    • Check my talk page, where I've listed some links to the claim. The most reputable would be the interview with Borlaug, in which he eludes to the reasoning that you have stated. Whether or not it is true, we can certainly state that "his work is often credited with saving a billion lives", that is definitely true. Also, it isn't necessarily incorrect to state that "1 billion new people means 1 billion lives saved"; those people probably would've been born regardless, it's just that the state of their lives on arrival is much better than they would've been had the famines been allowed to continue, and it's doubtful they would've survived otherwise (as the many best-selling doomsayers have attested to). --brian0918™ 30 June 2005 23:34 (UTC)
      • For the sake of NPOV I have added an explanatory footnote, if the Heritage Foundation tells me something more concrete we can cite that.--nixie 30 June 2005 23:54 (UTC)
  7. Images, I've removed Image:CIMMYT maize.jpg (fair use claim not strong anyway); Image:Borlaug1983.jpg; Image:HarrarStakmanMexico56.jpg; Image:Carter-borlaug-shake.jpg; Image:Elvin Charles Stakman.jpg, reducing the total fair use images to 4. I'll email the heritage foundation again and see if they'll give us a picture of the house licenced under the GFDL.--nixie 1 July 2005 03:45 (UTC)
    • The maize image isn't originally from the source that I cited. That source got it from another source--the image isn't new. I think it really adds to the article. --brian0918™ 1 July 2005 04:05 (UTC)
      • Its a neat image, but if we're going to get criticised for image copyrights we need to address those concerns. You have to consider that image isn't discussed in the context of the article and has little to do with Borlaug (as far as I can tell) which makes the fair use claim tenuous, thats why I removed it. I've also retagged the remaining fair use images as {{CopyrightedFreeUseProvidedThat}} since that seems to be the intent of the University of Minnesota gallery.--nixie 1 July 2005 04:26 (UTC)
  8. Should he be referred to as Dr. Norman etc in the lead?
  9. Should we prune the list of publications to those that have ISBN's, for consideration of page length and since anything old (and that specialised) would be very difficult to get a hold of anyway?--nixie 6 July 2005 01:39 (UTC)
    • Page length should never be a problem, especially since it's just text. As for accessibility, anyone who has access to a library can get those publications through interlibrary loan. --brian0918™ 6 July 2005 01:45 (UTC)

Changes

Changes look good, I think the biotech stuff could be merged into the future of global farming section. There are parts where the article seems to chatty, like Despite these setbacks, Borlaug has found encouragement. , At the end of his undergraduate education, Borlaug attended a life-changing lecture titled, etc, I'll have a go imprvoving the tone later if noone else does.--nixie 7 July 2005 00:39 (UTC)


Source for the billion lives quote

I heard back from the World Food Prize Foundation:

This quote came from an article in The Atlanticonline in January of 1997. The actual quote was "The form of agriculture that Borlaug preaches may have preented a billion deaths." You may want to try this link www.theatlantic.com/issues/97jan/borlaug/borlaug.htm . It was "Forgotten Benefactor of Humanity" by Gregg Easterbrook. Hope this helps.

Jan Douglas World Food Prize Foundation

--nixie 00:11, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

  • I've added that content. Can you ask her if they have any free images (free for any use provided that credit is given) related to Borlaug that could be used in the article, or if she has any other trivia or facts that would be good in the article? --brian0918™ Ni! 03:43, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Great Job!

I'd like to congratulate the people who were involved in writing this article on the splendid job they have done. It is amazing how much it has improved since I last saw it. As an Indian I feel that my county has probably benefited the most due to Dr Norman Borlaug's work in promoting (and not just developing) HYV wheat. Thank you all!

Old speeches and presentations

The bottom of the article looked like a Borlaug web directory, I've moved everything pre 2000 here.--nixie 05:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Critics and His Response to Critics

In the section 'Critics and His Response to Critics':
The Green Revolution was not a political revolution. As a result, there have been problems with equality in food distribution.
I suggest changing this to:
The Green Revolution was not a political revolution. As a result, there are problems with equality in food distribution.
I think it is important that while the 'Green Revolution' was not a political movement - that if its purpose was to effectively feed the world population equity of distribution is a primary importance. Certain analyses [[3]] indicate that at the time that the Green Revolution occurred there existed more than enough food for everyone, and that intensification (even if you do not accept Hopfenberg's conclusion) has yielded an even larger surplus today - enough to feed many times the current world population. L Hamm

  • The "Green Revolution" refers to his expansion through Mexico and South Asia in the 60s and 70s, so "have been" (ie: in the past) is more accurate. This phrase includes past problems and doesn't rule out current problems. Are you saying before the GR there was enough food for everyone, or after the GR? -- BRIAN0918  13:12, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
    • According to Pimentel, Hopfenberg and a few others this refers to before, but given its success clearly after as well. The link above has the methods used to compute the number of human beings that can be supported on agricultural production.L Hamm

Deleted personal life trivia

I deleted the following passages from the article:

—his three younger sisters were Palma Lillian (Behrens; 1916 to 2004), Charlotte (Culbert; born 1919) and Helen (1921 to 1921)—to Henry Oliver (1889 to 1971) and Clara (Vaala) Borlaug (1888 to 1972) on his grandparents' farm in Saude
He attended the one-teacher one-room New Oregon #8 rural school in Howard County up through eighth grade; today, the school building, built in 1865, is owned by the Norman Borlaug Heritage Foundation as part of "Project Borlaug Legacy".3 At Cresco High School, Borlaug played baseball and wrestled, where his coach continually encouraged him to "give 105%."
Borlaug met his wife, Margaret Gibson, while in college, as he waited tables at a Dinkytown coffee shop where they both worked. They would go on to have two children, Norman Jean "Jeanie" (later married "Laube") and William Borlaug. The Borlaugs currently have five grandchildren and two great-grandchildren. Their current residence is in northern Dallas, although Borlaug is only there a few weeks of the year. His wife, Margaret, who is now blind, has assistance from their daughter Jeanie with such things as reading the thousands of letters they receive through the mail— most of which are requests from around the world for Borlaug's autograph. Jeanie once came across a foreign postage stamp with her father's picture on it that the sender wanted signed. She has said she was surprised at how little of this mail comes from the United States.6

(I replaced the latter paragraph with a brief note that he is married and has two children.) These matters seem like totally nonnotable trivia; they're boring and they have nothing to do with his agricultural work, which is the only reason he's included in the encyclopedia. What's the need to include the inane slogan of his high school coach and his precise number of grandchildren? What's the reason to enumerate the names of members of his family if they aren't notable in themselves? We don't do this for any other famous figure. The mention of autograph letters just makes the article seem like it was written by a Borlaug fanboy, and the jab at the rarity of greens in the United States is gratuitous and irrelevant. Redquark 13:35, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your opinion. These sections survived the FAC process, which involved a lot more people's opinions, so unless there is serious dispute from several people about this, I'm still going to believe that people want them in the article. -- BRIAN0918  15:04, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
  • We don't create articles about nonnotable people. We do mention nonnotable people in articles (see any of the list of victims of various disasters). Borlaug's family and heritage were important to him, regardless of whether you consider it important to the article. Just because other editors aren't willing to do the research necessary to find out more about the history of other famous figures doesn't mean this article shouldn't have that content. Are we running out of digital paper here???
  • I've reinstituted part of your changes, removing some of the less relevant stuff (autographing letters, etc). -- BRIAN0918  15:15, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
    Thanks; I appreciate your willingness to compromise. But I would still like further deletions.
    First, a response to your arguments. Invoking the magic of the FAC process doesn't really amount to a defense of those passages. In my experience FAC can be fairly uneven; it depends on whether motivated and knowledgeable people happen to be reading FAC at the time the article is nominated. Also, the reason why nonnotable information should be removed from articles is not for lack of space but because it wastes the time of readers; an encyclopedia should provide a concise yet comprehensible summary of a topic, not present every last possible detail. It's irrelevant whether or not these matters are "important to him".
Aside from wasting time, I find some of the passages lend a POV slant to the article; they seem intended to present him as an inspirational figure. That alone is enough to delete the coach encouragement (as well as the grandfather advice following it, come to think of it), which sound like something out of a fawning documentary about a sports hero. Also, the later paragraph about his receiving the Nobel prize should be cut down in my opinion; it's much the same as that of many other prize winners, and is not particularly interesting, and again seems to have a fanboy slant. The lists of names I don't mind quite as much. I'll invite another user to do these edits, though, to show it's not just me. Redquark 15:39, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
  • How much of the FAC process have you experienced in only 145 edits??? You should read through the FAC page for this article. As for "wasting time", that's why there are section headers. If people want info on his family, go to the Family section. If they want info on his work, go to the work section. Simple as that. Not all of any article is going to hold the interest of everyone (although several people did say that this article held their interest all the way through, while nobody has said anything to the contrary except you). It is not irrelevent whether something is important to him, because it shows what sort of person he is and what motivates him. Should we remove all references to motivations from the article on Adolf Hitler? Others have expressed opinions exactly contrary to yours with respect to the coach/grandfather encouragement. They liked that content, and wanted it to remain. Inviting others to make your edits for you is not the point of discussion toward consensus. We reached a consensus on the FAC page where similar discussion was encountered, and reached the conclusion that this content was fine. Until such time that serious debate comes up by serious users, I'm going to default to telling you to read the FAC page for this article. -- BRIAN0918  15:58, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
I have no connection with Dr. Borlaug, Redquark, or Brian0918, but just wanted to say that I found the entire article interesting, including the personal and family sections. Far from being "fawning", I found this personal information humanized Dr. Borlaug and made him less of an idealized figure. If you want an example of uncritical fanboy drivel, read the Mariah Carey article, not this. -- Corvus 17:07, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

"Repudiate"

A person does not "repudiate" criticisms that are directed at him. A person repudiates ideas or beliefs with which he may be thought to be associated. It is a misuse of the word to state that he "repudiated" criticisms that were directed at him, and it's very jarring and distracting to read. I can't believe that wordchoice survived Peer Review. Babajobu 15:33, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

  • Do we need to break out the dictionary here? Repudiate: "to reject emphatically as unfounded, untrue, or unjust". Now stick that into the article: "although his work has faced environmental and socioeconomic criticisms, he has emphatically rejected most of these critiques as unfounded, untrue, or unjust". I've read through all the available interviews and watched all the available lectures, and this is how I come to the conclusion that "repudiated" is the perfect word. "Dismissed" sounds like he just brushes them off, and as for "rebut", that has commonly meant "to provide an argument/evidence to the contrary"; rebuttals are a normal part of an ongoing debate. In Borlaug's case, he not only provides evidence/arguments, he, well, emphatically rejects such criticisms (much as evolutionary biologists repudiate criticisms from creationists; it comes from having, in the opinion of the repudiator, the same old nonsense arguments thrown at you over an extended period of time). -- BRIAN0918  15:40, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
In all three of my dics (Shorter OED, MW Unabridged, and Encarta), generalized rejection is a secondary definition of the word, and the first (and large majority) of senses of the word entail the disassociation of oneself from something to which you might otherwise be (or be suspected to be) associated: a belief, a family member, whatever. And I think counting on a secondary and much-less-frequently used sense of the word is generally a bad idea, especially when it clashes so obviously with the primary senses of the word (he very obviously is not associated with criticisms of himself). I think it reads very awkward. Regardless, you've obviously doen a very good job otherwise on this article, so I'm happy to leave the final (choice of) word with you. Babajobu 16:08, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Alright, I'm just going to stick that definition into the article rather than use the ambiguous word. -- BRIAN0918  16:19, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
That reads much, much better. That was exactly the right thing to do. Babajobu 16:21, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Reference #15

This reference requires a subscription to view. Peoplesunionpro 17:52, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

  • That's why I provided a link to a duplicate of that article. -- BRIAN0918  20:28, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Borlaug Hypothesis

"On a global scale, this view holds strictly true ceteris paribus, provided that all land consists either of forests or is used for agriculture. Because other land uses exist, such as fallow, savannah, or brush, further research is necessary to ascertain what land has been converted for what purposes, in order to determine how true this view remains. Increased profits from high yield production may also induce cropland expansion in any case, although as world food needs decrease, this expansion may decrease as well."

Is this section in error? Under land uses are savannah, and brush, but these would seem to be biomes not land uses. Other land uses would be, I think more accurately: aquaculture(?), pasture, fallow, and commercial (non-food) crops, urban, and brownfields. L Hamm 18:48, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Other info to include at some point

This list of extra info was sent to me by a Borlaug biographer. Please do not copy it exactly.

  1. George Champlin, a former high school football teammate at Cresco was very instrumental in persuading Norman to join him as a student-athlete at the University of Minnesota. One of Bernie Bierman's national champion "Golden Gopher" football players, Champlin also helped facilitate Norman's enrollment in the General College after failing the University entrance exam. Borlaug gives much credit to Champlin for his role. They remained friends until Champlin's recent death.
  2. In his sophomore year at Minnesota Norman helped recruit his former Cresco High School wrestling coach, Dave Bartelma, to become coach at the University. It was under Bartelma's direction that Norman helped introduce wrestling into Minnesota high schools through exhibition matches. With these early beginnings aided by Borlaug and his teammates, Bartelma became known as the father of Minnesota high school wrestling. He was also a very successful coach at the University.
  3. Last year in 2004 Dr. Borlaug was inducted into the Iowa Wrestling Hall of Fame. Of particular interest is the fact that the Iowa Hall of Fame is located in Cresco. Borlaug was present for the ceremonies, even though he had just returned to the U.S. after a 10-day trip to Uganda. Just prior to that Africa trip he had celebrated his 90th birthday in Mexico City.
  4. Borlaug has often spoken of his boyhood dream of playing baseball with the Chicago Cubs. He was a key person involved in the introduction of Little League Baseball in Mexico. Last spring in 2004 when he was in Boston to give the commencement address at the Harvard Medical School, he threw out the first pitch at a Red Sox game in Fenway Park. (This was after his trip to Cresco for the Hall of Fame induction and a subsequent trip to Minneapolis to deliver a commencement address at the University of Minnesota College of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences. The man is indefatigable!)

— 0918BRIAN • 2005-12-15 22:43

Chart Axis Should Start at Zero

IMO, in the wheat yield charts, the vertical axis should start at zero and not at 500, because it might create a wrong first impression otherwise (the same applies to many demographic charts in wikipedia, btw). 193.171.121.30 08:29, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

  • The point is to focus in on the change that has occurred, although I understand your concern. — 0918BRIAN • 2006-01-15 15:04

Changes regarding origins of Office of Special Studies

I know that it is taboo to edit a featured article, but there were some unverified (and false) claims here. The previous version of the article stated that agricultural production was lowered in Mexico as a result of agrarian reform. While the team that surveyed Mexico for the Rockefeller Foundation beleived ejidos and other small farms that came out of the (Mexican) revolution to be inefficient, the reason for low agricultural productivity of grains had more to do with the effects of the war and of economic depression than on landholdings. Countless studies show that smaller farms have higher outputs per unit land area than larger ones. The reality is that Camacho was reluctant continue with Cárdenas's agrarian reform, and sought a vision of a more industrialized nation.

Also, the previous version of the article stated that the Mexican government requested that the United States government help them carry out the program, and the US gov't passed the task on to the Rockefeller Foundation. For the most part, this was Henry Wallace's personal project. He had been the Secretary of Agriculture under Roosevelt, and his father started a very profitable maize developing corporation. Wallace spent a lot of time in Mexico, built a personal relationship with Camacho, and personally called a meeting with Rockefeller Foundation officials to try to convince them to adopt some sort of agricultural development program in Mexico. No US federal government policy was actually involved at all at this point in history. Justin 01:49, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

too long

It is of appropriate length, staying focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). [4]

not true for this article, i think i could do with some severe trimming.for example:

  • Two of their children, Ole Olson Borlaug and Nels Olson Borlaug (Norman's grandfather), were integral in the establishment of the Immanuel Norwegian Evangelical Lutheran Congregation in the small Norwegian-American community of Saude, near Cresco, Iowa in 1889.[3][4]
  • He attended the one-teacher, one-room New Oregon #8 rural school in Howard County up through eighth grade. Today, the school building, built in 1865, is owned by the Norman Borlaug Heritage Foundation as part of "Project Borlaug Legacy".[5] At Cresco High School, Borlaug played football, baseball and wrestled, where his coach, Dave Barthelma, continually encouraged him to "give 105%."

trueblood 18:04, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

New Article

Information on his receiving the medal today: Greatest Living American Ignored (huffingtonpost.com) ... I'll leave it to the expert article-writers here to decide if/when to incorporate this. ~Kylu (u|t) 22:56, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Could we add a reference somewhere to the Leon Hesser book, The Man Who Fed The World ? (talk) 17:13 5 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.58.152.238 (talk)

Vandalism?

This seems very wrong, unless there's a side to Norman Borlaug I was VERY unaware of. Even then, "insatiable jungle fever" is hardly an appropriate term to use, so I'm thinking this has to be vandalism. 74.135.138.255 (talk) 04:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC) 2-15-08

Edit: Corrected it, hopefully won't get changed again —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.135.138.255 (talk) 04:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

  • It was vandalism added 20 minutes before you found it. — BRIAN0918 • 2008-02-15 14:29Z

Wikipedia being used as a reference

If you look at citation 26, it seems to be using a Wikipedia article (Green Revolution) as a reference. If it is doing this, it should cite the reference directly. If it is not, it should be changed to make it more clear (and a real reference should probably be added). Richard001 (talk) 09:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Infobox

I expanded the infobox and added the Noble Prize image. Also, Borlaug is one of the six American Noble Peace Prize winners alive today, I think that should be noted somewhere. Thoughts?

~G Geasterb 19:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Photo of apartment he was living in at University of Minnesota

As it so happens, I've been working with an author writing a biography of Norman Borlaug and he asked me (as a Wikipedian photographer in Minneapolis) to take some photos of where he lived at the U, based on addressed supplied by Mr. Borlaug. Unfortunately, urban renewal (and the ill-fated 35W Bridge) have claimed all but one building. I have a photo of it (and the relevant area of the article has no photo), but my only source for its veracity are emails from the biographer (Dr. Noel Vietmeyer). Since this an FA, I want to be careful not to create a problem. Would it be useful? If so, how could we move forward? --Bobak (talk) 22:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Won and awarded

I would like to change a sentence to read, "Borlaug is one of five people in history to have won the Nobel Peace Prize and been awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom and Congressional Gold Medal."

The last two awards are not won, but are awarded or bestowed. I await your thoughts. 129.174.97.34 (talk) 17:31, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

The Nobel is also, for that matter, not "won" in the sense you mean, but this is a matter of style, not substance. If you decide to follow WIKI protocol and "Be Bold", please change them all. And note the change I just made -- it's six, not five -- the Newsweek writer who appears to have been the source of "five" omitted Aung San Suu Kyi. . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 14:21, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Billion?

I'm sorry if this has already been covered - the discussion page seems short for such a great guy, but I couldn't find an archive (maybe I just missed it)...anyway, question is: What about the "billion" figure quoted by Penn on Bullshit!? Where does that come from, and why does the article say 245 million instead? Thank you. Applejuicefool (talk) 16:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe the difference in numbers relates to deaths versus starvation without dying. 245 million were saved from dying where "over a billion" were saved from a LIFE (or death) of starvation. It's just a thought, though... I don't have any sources...67.139.16.162 (talk) 17:36, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Organic farming yields.

In the section of the article Borlaug hypothesis a claim was made about the yields of organic farming methods being low. The jury is still out regarding the relationship of yields between conventional (i.e. Green Revolution) methods and organic methods. See Organic farming for various citations. I understand that the previous version linked to the Organic farming article, but making the argument that organic farming is "low-yield", while the cited article disputes this claim seems misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sfingram (talk • contribs) 16:44, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

this is pretty much true for any significant crop you can think of, and i doubt anyone will want to wast time debating it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.104.242.4 (talk) 04:50, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
There is a lot missing from the "Criticisms" section. Organic, organic-like, and modern biodynamic farming practices are vastly more productive and less costly than what the "green" revolution has lead to: industrial agriculture. This is more or less a settled debate and really needs to be expanded upon here, IMHO. 75.189.234.110 (talk) 12:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Provide some reliable sources and this can be considered.--ukexpat (talk) 16:04, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Here are the reliable sources you requested:
Can we now make the adjustments to the material to remove the misleading statement the original user requested? David Tornheim (talk) 17:20, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Defeatured...

Wow, what a coincidence. The article was de-featured a day after his death, after a Featured Article Review process that's been going on for a while now. — BRIAN0918 • 2009-09-13 23:24Z

Purely coincidental. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Are you sure he didn't see the handwriting on the wall, impending decertification, which caused him to die? Mrs. Nixon got a stroke and died after reading "All the President's Men". Farewell, Professor Borlaug. President of Chicago (talk) 04:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

On the positive side, there will be lots of new sources (obituaries and the like) so it could be re-featured in short order. The subpage at WP:FAR should provide a list of the article's shortcomings, although no doubt it has changed substantially in the last week or so. Requiescat in pace. -- Hyphen8d (talk) 18:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Norman_Borlaug/Archive_1&oldid=1136251007"