→Pesticide Action Network: Reply
|
|
||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
*:::I have used various search terms, but as KoA points out, if it is a decent source, it is almost certainly going to mention the term "pesticide action network" somewhere within it. [[User:Smartse|SmartSE]] ([[User talk:Smartse|talk]]) 09:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC) |
*:::I have used various search terms, but as KoA points out, if it is a decent source, it is almost certainly going to mention the term "pesticide action network" somewhere within it. [[User:Smartse|SmartSE]] ([[User talk:Smartse|talk]]) 09:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC) |
||
* '''Strong keep''' – Pesticide Action Network has been among the most influential and most active NGOs in the area of chemical safety and international chemicals/pesticide management. During more than a decade, it has e.g. contributed significantly to negotiations under [[SAICM]] and the [[Rotterdam Convention]] as well as to the Code of Conduct.<sup>[https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/40352/Pesticides_Ch3.pdf][https://enb.iisd.org/events/2019-meetings-conferences-parties-basel-rotterdam-and-stockholm-conventions/daily-report-8][https://www.saicm.org/Beyond2020/IntersessionalProcess/Stakeholdersinputs/tabid/6098/][https://www.undrr.org/understanding-disaster-risk/terminology/hips/ch0008]</sup> Its European subsection (PAN Europe) is an accredited stakeholder to the [[European Chemicals Agency]] (ECHA) and to the [[European Food Safety Authority]] (EFSA).<sup>[https://echa.europa.eu/about-us/partners-and-networks/stakeholders/echas-accredited-stakeholder-organisations][https://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/stakeholders-registered-list.pdf]</sup> PAN Europe even currently holds the seat on the EFSA Stakeholder Bureau representing "NGOs and Advocacy Groups".<sup>[https://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2022-12/List-of-Bureau-Members-And-Alternate-Members.pdf]</sup> [[CropLife International]], PAN’s long-term opponent from industry side, lists the Pesticide Action Network in the same breath as the [[World Bank]], the United Nations [[Food and Agriculture Organization]], the [[African Union]] and [[WWF]].<sup>[https://croplife.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf_files/Managing-Obsolete-Stocks-of-Crop-Protection-Products.pdf]</sup> --[[User:Leyo|Leyo]] 20:49, 3 October 2023 (UTC) |
* '''Strong keep''' – Pesticide Action Network has been among the most influential and most active NGOs in the area of chemical safety and international chemicals/pesticide management. During more than a decade, it has e.g. contributed significantly to negotiations under [[SAICM]] and the [[Rotterdam Convention]] as well as to the Code of Conduct.<sup>[https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/40352/Pesticides_Ch3.pdf][https://enb.iisd.org/events/2019-meetings-conferences-parties-basel-rotterdam-and-stockholm-conventions/daily-report-8][https://www.saicm.org/Beyond2020/IntersessionalProcess/Stakeholdersinputs/tabid/6098/][https://www.undrr.org/understanding-disaster-risk/terminology/hips/ch0008]</sup> Its European subsection (PAN Europe) is an accredited stakeholder to the [[European Chemicals Agency]] (ECHA) and to the [[European Food Safety Authority]] (EFSA).<sup>[https://echa.europa.eu/about-us/partners-and-networks/stakeholders/echas-accredited-stakeholder-organisations][https://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/stakeholders-registered-list.pdf]</sup> PAN Europe even currently holds the seat on the EFSA Stakeholder Bureau representing "NGOs and Advocacy Groups".<sup>[https://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2022-12/List-of-Bureau-Members-And-Alternate-Members.pdf]</sup> [[CropLife International]], PAN’s long-term opponent from industry side, lists the Pesticide Action Network in the same breath as the [[World Bank]], the United Nations [[Food and Agriculture Organization]], the [[African Union]] and [[WWF]].<sup>[https://croplife.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf_files/Managing-Obsolete-Stocks-of-Crop-Protection-Products.pdf]</sup> --[[User:Leyo|Leyo]] 20:49, 3 October 2023 (UTC) |
||
*:<small>''Note:'' Leyo has been page-blocked from this AfD page as a [[WP:AE]] action. --[[User:Tryptofish|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish|talk]]) 22:56, 11 October 2023 (UTC)</small> |
|||
*:{{Re|Leyo}} I've looked through all of these links and still none provide any in-depth independent coverage. All they do is demonstrate that it exists. If it is as important as you claim then it should have attracted much more coverage. [[User:Smartse|SmartSE]] ([[User talk:Smartse|talk]]) 22:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC) |
*:{{Re|Leyo}} I've looked through all of these links and still none provide any in-depth independent coverage. All they do is demonstrate that it exists. If it is as important as you claim then it should have attracted much more coverage. [[User:Smartse|SmartSE]] ([[User talk:Smartse|talk]]) 22:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC) |
||
*:: The available information is more than sufficient to conclude on PAN’s influential activities in many processes within the area of chemical safety and international chemicals/pesticide management. I haven’t checked if what you claim would be available for other NGOs or CropLife International. --[[User:Leyo|Leyo]] 05:56, 4 October 2023 (UTC) |
*:: The available information is more than sufficient to conclude on PAN’s influential activities in many processes within the area of chemical safety and international chemicals/pesticide management. I haven’t checked if what you claim would be available for other NGOs or CropLife International. --[[User:Leyo|Leyo]] 05:56, 4 October 2023 (UTC) |
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
This fringe organization fails both the Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies) as well as the Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline. Having a lot of Google hits is not going to turn the tide either. In fact, there are hardly no independent and reliable sources that actually describe the activities and achievements of this organisation. 62.183.185.10 (talk, c) 15:42, 27 September 2023 (UTC) — 62.183.185.10 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
The organization has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the organization.(my emphasis). Let's examine the sources that you added in detail to see what they say about it:
Shortly after the Code of Conduct was first issued, the International Organization of Consumers Unions (IOCU) and the Pesticide Action Network (PAN) developed a Citizens’ Action Guide to the Code of Conduct (Goldenman and Rengam 1987). PAN also published a consolidated guide to the chemical tools and conventions (Goldenman and Pozo Vera 2008) which provided a checklist for implementation of the Code of Conduct. A dedicated Code monitoring module has been developed to help concerned organisations to monitor compliance with the Code of Conduct by governments and industry (Pesticide Action Network Asia and Pacific and Pesticide Action Network UK 2016). In addition, PAN carries out projects that promote implementation of parts of the Code of Conduct, in particular on alternatives to more hazardous pesticides.
Member organizations of the Pesticide Action Network (PAN) conducted community monitoring in 13 countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America between 2007 and 2009 (PAN 2010). They assessed pesticide use practices, use of personal protective equipment and self-reported symptoms of pesticide poisoning. Based on this survey, their assessment was that 25 years after initial publication of the Code of Conduct, pesticides in these regions were still exposing farmers to significant health risks.The best source of all of them, but the text is about reports that they have published rather than the organisation itself and is two small paragraphs in a 60 page document which is itself only chapter 3 of 12 of a larger report.
Noting high turnover, Pesticide Action Network (PAN) called for the appointment of experts who can complete their terms.and then several mentions of them supporting various decisions. Clearly not significant coverage.
Known to cause a high incidence of severe or irreversible adverse effects on human health or the environment (Pesticide Action Network, 2009).That's it - not significant coverage.
They would only delete an article if they felt their omissions would leave nothing substantial.SmartSE (talk) 10:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:19, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The term “prior informed consent” appears to have been coined by David Bull of Oxfam (UK) in the late 1970s to convey a trade norm specifically in the context of trade in hazardous pesticides.15 Bull’s work at Oxfam influenced the Pesticides Action Network (PAN), which lobbied international institutions to regulate pesticides. PAN was motivated both to address serious environmental and health consequences of current pesticide practices and to curb what it saw as irresponsible behavior by multinational corporations (Paarlberg 1994: 316–319). Thus, the moral, legal, and economic origins of prior informed consent came together in pesticides trade.from "Informed Consent: A Negotiated Formula for Trade in Risky Organisms and Chemicals" by Amanda Wolf. Is this nothing more than a passing mention in your view? Is PAN not prominent here? Did they "just happen to be one of the participants"? For context the concept of Prior informed is central to the Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent. To me the answer is no to all of those questions, but we might have different sensibilities here. Let's hear from others. {{u|Gtoffoletto}} talk 14:31, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pesticides Action Network (PAN), which lobbied international institutions to regulate pesticides. And I quote the abstract (passing mention?) of another source:
The establishment of PIC as a binding international rule was sealed by eventually gaining the support of the chemical industry in the early 1990s, after initial opposition, after a civil society campaign led by the Pesticide Action Network (PAN), an alliance of nongovernmental organizations.[30] Have you included this source in your review? {{u|Gtoffoletto}} talk 19:07, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
took a look at all the sources mentioned here so far (including paywalled ones): can you provide us with the relevant portions of text from this one [31] that mentions PAN in the abstract? Also from Toxic Chemicals in America that contains a full entry on PAN. I've been reviewing all of the sources myself and have come to a very different conclusion than yours but I do not have access to all the full texts. Thanks. {{u|Gtoffoletto}} talk 19:13, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]