This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
plants and
botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is propaganda, with no mention of their very unpopular UK trials of GM crops on UK farms. They work with big corporations like BASF, and have to rely on huge security (private AND UK Police) to prevent protesters disrupting plantation and growing of this Big Business Frankenstein Food. GM crops are all about pattening our food.
This item is written as if they use selective breeding, and their title is suggestive of the Orwellian Ministry of Love idea. Please can someone start a criticism section, and open people's eyes to this bunch of pro GM sharks
It's true that this article is lifted from the institute's PR material but it's also the case that mentioning nothing except their trials of GM crops is hopelessly biased (the great majority of NIAB's work is on selective breeding). I've reverted the article to the previous version but I agree that it does need to be rewritten from someone who isn't a members of NIAB's PR department (and who, for that matter, is familiar with wiki-formatting, e.g. links...)
OldSpot61 (
talk)
11:24, 19 March 2010 (UTC)reply
OK, but it's silly for the only information on the page to be a highly inaccurate and prejudicial statement in the 'Criticism' section. Better to delete the whole lot until a non-PR person rewrites the pages.
OldSpot61 (
talk)
13:30, 19 March 2010 (UTC)reply