Talk:Organic coffee
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled
[edit]Talk:Organic coffee
Please do not delete this page. Although similar to the page cited, the organic coffee article submitted is not plagarized.
If necessary, the topic (organic coffee) can be submitted as a request for others to write/improve upon the article submitted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdehler2004 (talk • contribs)
- Sorry, my initial reaction was based on the fact that coffeeresearch.org had some dollar numbers and very little content on it; so I figured it was an advertisement. Seems to be OK now though. -- intgr 13:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Negros organic coffee
[edit]This is grown at the foot of Mount Kanlanon, Negros Occidental.[1] --Florentino floro (talk) 09:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- The list is of the "primary" producers of organic coffee, not an exhaustive list of all producers. maxsch (talk) 19:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- Did you not NOTICE the edit by other editors, which claim that: "The primary producers of organic coffee are; Guatemala, Peru, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and Mexico[citation needed]." - do not have citation? And Wikipedia edits or anything added must have resources or references, otherwise, they are not reliable. I can put there Chile or Spain, but how can the reader or scholar cite this article if there is no citation? So, my edit of Negros, is supported by 2 links. Refer this discussion to improve this article to Filipino editor --Lenticel (talk), Ateneo expert and for Valencia, Negros, just a road away from this coffee. ---Florentino floro (talk) 06:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- I found a reference for the "primary producers" of organic coffee, and the ones listed as the main producers are Peru, Ethiopia, and Mexico. I do not mean to slight the Philippines, which is indeed a producer of organic coffee (among some 40 other countries). I don't think it makes any sense to have every single producing country, much less every region of every countre, so I have shortened the list of primary producers even further, to agree with the reference. Again, I want to emphasize, yes, Negros, Philippines does produce organic coffee, but the procedures there are no different from the stringent requirements of organic production anywhere. maxsch (talk) 21:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- Did you not NOTICE the edit by other editors, which claim that: "The primary producers of organic coffee are; Guatemala, Peru, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and Mexico[citation needed]." - do not have citation? And Wikipedia edits or anything added must have resources or references, otherwise, they are not reliable. I can put there Chile or Spain, but how can the reader or scholar cite this article if there is no citation? So, my edit of Negros, is supported by 2 links. Refer this discussion to improve this article to Filipino editor --Lenticel (talk), Ateneo expert and for Valencia, Negros, just a road away from this coffee. ---Florentino floro (talk) 06:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
NPOV
[edit]I am dubious of the claim the traditional coffee has pesticides in it after harvesting, cleaning, processing and roasting. I am also dubious of the claim that most traditional coffee is not shade grown. The coffee plant needs shade, this shade may not always come from trees, but the type of shade doesn't affect the organic/conventional label. I've removed a lot of this unsubstantiated praise of organic farming. I don't think it helps the cause (which, incidentally, I support). maxsch (talk) 19:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- Last night, the counterpart news video on this article was aired on ABS-CBN TV Patrol, our top TV; and I thought that this was a commercial thing; but, the entire video reveals the launching of a nationalism / nationalistic FIRST, in Philippines, on coffee. And Negros Occidental, specifically at the foot of Mt. Kanlaon, is a virgin pasture and agricultural land where this organic coffee was born. The video also shows the delicate and minute obedience of the process to international organic standards. - --Florentino floro (talk) 06:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- Mr Floro, this is completely irrelevant to my comments. Please stay on topic. I made a lot of changes to this page, not just to your edits. It needed work. It had (and still has to some extent) serious issues with neutrality. I am not talking about the inclusion (or not) of the Philippines on the list of producer nations. If anyone has references for the claims about the health benefits of organic coffee, I am happy to include those claims, but as it stands, they don't seem scientifically valid. maxsch (talk) 23:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
You should be dubious of the claim that traditional coffee is not shade grown. Guatemalan and Colombia coffees, for instance, are almost exclusively shade grown, regardless of whether they are organic. But coffee does not "need shade." That's a myth. Shade is beneficial for some coffees, depending on several factors, including altitude, heat, humidity, etc.. Brazilian coffees, for example, are largely grown without shade. And Brazil is one of the largest producing countries. Same goes for Vietnam. The truth is that nearly all organic coffee is shade grown because other inputs are not available.
The other point I'll make is about the criteria. It says organic certification requires a crop rotation plan. That's ridiculous and I challenge anyone to produce certifier standards that include that criteria. The lifespan of a coffee tree is about 25 years. And they are replanted on schedules. It's not uncommon to find 50-year-old trees on some organic coffee farms. How could they be rotated? That needs to be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.167.11.3 (talk) 17:51, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
People get way too wrapped up in the whole "organics" versus "synthetics" or "chemicals"/"pesticides" mantra. Certification and legal aspects aside, organic agriculture is about organic matter. Soil is supposed to be alive. Microbes decompose organic matter and produce plant-usable nutrients. Compost/humus is a nutrient rich, biologically active material; the result of thoroughly decayed organic matter. Humus formation is important for a soil to be able to hold onto nutrients and support microbes and plants. Synthetic\chemical salt fertilizers do nothing to build soil\humus and instead drive away earthworms and other beneficial organisms. Soil minerals are depleted and this affects the mineral content of the crops. Furthermore, monocultures increase incidents of pests and plant diseases for that particular crop and the damage which occurs from the pest. Therefore, organic agriculture stresses the importance of organic inputs (i.e. manures, industry by-products which can be composted), biological pest controls (fighting bad organisms with good ones instead of killing them all indiscriminately) and polyculture. For example, while coffee shrubs can't exactly be "rotated" as you would annual crops, they can certainly be planted with other crops (companion planting).71.174.7.94 (talk) 18:52, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Wiki Education assignment: CMN2160A
[edit]
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2022 and 15 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zariagibson (article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Zariagibson (talk) 20:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
[edit]
This article is the subject of an educational assignment supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program.
The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)