Talk:Alex Avery (researcher)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Agropedia Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Agriculture, which collaborates on articles related to agriculture. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments This article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Alex Avery (researcher), has edited Wikipedia as 66.82.9.86 (talk · contribs)

[edit] please explain removal of reference

i don`t agree with the removal of the nyt quote, so i undid the edit, do kindly explain why this is irrelevant. also why is calling him a vehement critic negative language?trueblood (talk) 13:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it is hardly vandalism to report information published in the New York Times, which they deemed relevant for inclusion. I tried to enlarge the context, though, to include that he claims that those he disagrees with may also have conflicts of interest. I did change it just to list the companies, instead of explain what they did, as that point wasn't explicitly made in the report. Don't remove either one unless you have a source which concludes that the New York Times article is wrong. "Vehement" may have a connotation of irrationally opposed to, so I guess it may be negative; "leading" seems appropriate because he was interviewed on the subject by the Times. I added a quote from the times that shows the depth of his criticism. Also, please don't revert to earlier versions and lose the work I've done wikifying and categorizing the article. Rigadoun (talk) 15:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Insinuations

Per the biographies of living persons rule, I've removed some sections which were placed to insinuate a conflict of interest. Mentioning in isolation that specific works of the author were co-written by so-and-so and Monsanto is clearly such an insinuation. If a reliable source is making a direct claim of criticism against Alex Avery, then quote that, but dancing around a serious isn't good encyclopedia writing. Jefffire (talk) 16:13, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

i reinstated the nyt quote, it really fits in with the context, avery insinuates that positive findings about benefits of organic food are contaminated by the researchers funding and the nyt pointed out that avery himself might have a conflict of interest. what is wron with that? trueblood (talk) 17:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

the complete qute is:

Mr. Avery said Mr. Heaton's study was tainted because of the Soil Association's interests.

A number of research trials time and time again have not found any significant differences, he said. You need very large, carefully designed and carefully controlled studies to prove that there is a difference because of large natural variability.

Pressed to be more specific, Mr. Avery whose organization has received financing from Monsanto, DowElanco and the Ag-Chem Equipment Company, which are involved in conventional agriculture and biotechnology, did not offer further criticism trueblood (talk) 17:27, 7 February 2008 (UTC)