How Wikipedia Pollutes the Green Revolution
Ally Luo
English Literature & Composition 11
Delta25
Mr.Crow
April 2, 2024
1
How Wikipedia Pollutes the Green Revolution
Introduction
Mark Twain once said, “A lie can travel halfway around the world
while the truth is still putting on its shoes.” If this lie wants to complete
its global journey at the fastest speed, Wikipedia, this winged steed,
would be its best choice. Common issues like incredible editors, weak
sources, and erroneous claims on Wikipedia can all become the breeding
ground for fallacies, and the petri dish is society. In the following
paragraphs, I will discuss this viewpoint through an article on Wikipedia
that talks about the Green Revolution.
The Green Revolution is an important concept in the Human
Geography and the Agriculture. This term was first used by William S.
Gaurd, the administrator of the U.S. Agency for International
Development, in a speech to introduce the revolution in the field of
agriculture (Britannica). It refers to a movement that diffused modern
agricultural farming methods such as to developing countries after the
mid-20th century. During this period, new farming technologies such as
genetically modified organisms(GMOs), chemical pesticides, fertilizers,
and new agricultural machinery have rapidly promoted the development
of modern agriculture. Because of the advancements brought by the
Green Revolution, the scale of agricultural cultivation has been further
2
expanded than before and the quality of the crops also has been
improved a lot. These changes have reshaped the urban-rural
relationship and population migration throughout modern society by
improving agricultural productivity. More farmers change their careers
from farmers to workers and migrate to cities for job opportunities. This
progress promoted the transformation from an agricultural country to an
industrial country, stimulating the multipolar development of the world
(Cultural Landscape 334, 335).
Figure 1. Dewald Kirsten. “Wide angle image of a crop spray machine
spraying chemicals on wheat crop on a farm in south africa.” 10 Nov
2020. shutterstock. https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/wide-
angle-image-crop-spray-machine-1850978332
Strong Source
Wikipedia itself states that it is a free online encyclopedia, created
and entitled by volunteers around the world and hosted by the Wikipedia
Foundation (Wikipedia). It provides articles for all kinds of people in the
world and anyone who has signed an account on the Wikipedia website
3
can edit the article. As of 13 March 2024, there are more than 6 million
articles in the English Wikipedia, however, no one is ultimately
responsible for any claims in Wikipedia because of the open
structure (Wikipedia).
The Wikipedia article "Green Revolution" has some clear and relevant
claims with highly credible sources. Such a claim is as follows: "The
Green Revolution… saw greatly increased crop yields." The source given
by the author to prove the correctness of this claim is an article called
"Yields vs. land use: How the Green Revolution enabled us to feed a
growing population" published in Our World in Data and last retrieved on
28 November 2022. The author of this article is Hannah Ritchie, a
researcher at the Oxford Martin Program in Global Development at the
University of Oxford and deputy editor and lead researcher at Our World
Data (Ritchie Hannah profile). According to the website of the Oxford
Martin School, she holds a BSc in Environmental Geoscience, an MSc in
Carbon Management, and a PhD in GeoSciences from the University of
Edinburgh. She also published on the global energy system, climate
change, Biodiversity, and global health. At the same time, the publication
platform of this article, Our World in Data, is a data portal produced by
the Oxford Martin Programme on Global Development at the University
of Oxford (Harvard University). This portal illustrates the
interconnections among global health issues and the roles they play in
4
altering living conditions over time. The target audiences are both
members of the general public and academics, so it presents results of
quantitative science to present researchers with a starting point to make
it easier to find both data sources and analysis (Our World in Data). This
article was published on August 22, 2017, seven years ago, so it can still
be a reliable resource for the author to cite (Our World in Data).
Weak Source
Although Wikipedia articles usually cite some strong sources to prove
their declaration, some claims are still supported by weak sources. For
instance, in the Wikipedia article "Green Revolution", the author states
that "Almost half the people on the Earth are currently fed as a result of
synthetic nitrogen fertilizer use." The source given is as follows: an
article written by Jan Willem Erisman, Mark A. Sutton, James Galloway,
Zbigniew Klimont, and Wilfried Winiwarter titled "How a century of
ammonia synthesis changed the world". This article discusses in detail
the impact of synthetic nitrogen technology, Haber-Bosch nitrogen, on
human society in modern times from the perspectives of economy,
military, and agriculture (Nature Geoscience). Here is what the cited
article says: "Our updated estimate for 2008 is 48% - so the lives of
around half of humanity are made possible by Haber-Bosch nitrogen." It's
obvious that the meaning of this sentence is different from the the
citation of Wikipedia article since in the original paragraph, the
5
conclusion in cited article is analyzed based on the estimated value of
2008. However, the Wikipedia article, says that “Currently, half of the
people on the Earth are fed as a result of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer use
(Wikipedia).” According to the data provided by the publication platform,
Nature Geoscience, the article “How a century of ammonia synthesis
changed the world" was published on 28 September 2008, so, it's
reasonable for Jan Willem Erisman to use their estimated value for 2008.
But the Wikipedia article "Green Revolution" was last edited on 26
February 2024. The conclusion drawn from the 2008 forecast data for
2024 cannot be considered a rational one because of this 16-year gap.
Also, about these four authors of this article, after researching on Google
Scholar, I found that both of their research areas are all environmental
science rather than agriculture, and they all focus on studying the
circulation of nitrogen in nature and its environmental impacts rather
than the production of fertilizers required for agricultural production.
Also, this article not only introduces the impact of nitrogen fertilizer on
agricultural production but also spends a lot of paragraphs analyzing the
application of nitrogen in the military industry, indicating that this article
is not specifically written about the role of fertilizers in the green
revolution but introducing ammonia synthesis (Nature Geosciencce).
Finally, the publication date of this article is September 28, 2008, and it
6
has been 15 years since the last revision date of “Green Revolution",
February 26, 2024. This article is outdated (Nature Geoscience).
In conclusion, it's hard to consider this source as a strong one, since it
lacks credible authors or adequate argumentations relating to the claims
and it's outdated. Also, it doesn't support the claim in Wikipedia. The
author should choose an article on the impact of various fertilizers on
agricultural production in different regions of the world to support the
claim.
Alternative Source
Based on the claim that "The development of synthetic nitrogen
fertilizer... has been estimated that almost half the people on the Earth
are currently fed as a result of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer use." I
searched for a more reliable resource, "The Future of Fertilizer Use"
written by Symiah Barnett, to replace with the article titled "How a
Century of Ammonia Synthesis Changed the World" (House of Commons
Library). This article was published on January 16, 2024, which is quite
close to the last edited time, 26 February 2024, of the Wikipedia article
(POST). In the article, the author analyzes the influence of chemical
fertilizers on food security and economics by listing data from "Our World
in Data" that “As of 2015, more than 50% of the global population was
fed by crops grown with artificial fertilizers.” Also, Symiah Barnett states
that “There is a trend of increasing nitrogen fertilizer use with global
7
population growth over recent decades.” Based on the data from "Our
World in Data", the author estimates that the global population is
predicted to grow by approximately 2 billion people by 2050 with the
development of fertilizer technology (House of Commons Library). All of
these statements could prove the claim that "The development of
synthetic nitrogen fertilizer has significantly supported global population
growth - it has been estimated that almost half the people on the Earth
are currently fed as a result of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer use." The
author of "The Future of Fertilizer Use" is Symiah Barnett, who works as
an environment adviser for the Parliamentary Office of Science and
Technology at the House of Commons (POST). As I clicked his name on
the article, a profile of Symiah Barnett popped up on an official POST
page. He works as an environment adviser for the Parliamentary Office of
Science and Technology in the House of Commons and focuses on food
security and the environment and has written many articles relating to
modern agriculture development (POST). The publication of this article
is the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. It introduces itself
as a research and knowledge exchange service and it makes sure to
publish impartial, non-partisan, timely, and peer-reviewed research
(POST). In conclusion, "The Future of Fertilizer Use" written by Symiah
Barnett could be considered as a stronger source for the Wikipedia
article.
8
Figure 2. Symiah Barnett. “Overall fertiliser use (kg/ha) on all crops and
grass, Great Britain 1983-2017.” November 2018. POST.
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/POST-PN-
0589/POST-PN-0589.pdf
Claim without Source
Not all claims in the Wikipedia article "The Green Revolution" are
supported by strong sources. For example, in the paragraph "Second
Green Revolution", the author states a claim that "The yield rates of
Green Revolution... have been declining {since the second half of the
twentieth century}.... " without any source given. Wikipedia itself can not
be considered a reliable source because Wikipedia states that it is not a
reliable source since anyone can edit its official website. So unsourced
ideas that appear on Wikipedia would become even less credible. On the
other hand, the conclusion of the article conveys such a message that the
9
Green Revolution caused bad results in some regions. It would confuse
the audience for different reasons. Without a reliable source that gives
more detailed information or data related to the claim, it's hard for
audiences to find out which regions are suffering from the decline or
what action causes this serious problem and then blindly believe that the
Green Revolution would bring bad results in any case instead of
analyzing the reasons that cause such a situation. What's more serious is
if someone cites this unreliable claim with the absence of a source and
treats it as a highly credible source, it would cause people to
misunderstand that we must stop the Green Revolution to control the
decline of crop yield. That can not be considered as a good outcome at
all. So, in a word, a claim without any source can't be seen as a reliable
source.
Erroneous Claim
There is also a wrong claim in the Wikipedia. In the paragraph that
describes the Green Revolution in China, the the author asserts that
“China has not expanded the area of cultivable land {from 2023 to2024}.”
However, according to the 2023 China Natural Resources Bulletin
released by the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Central People's
Government of the People's Republic of China in February 2024, the total
amount of arable land in China has continued to grow net, achieving the
target of 1.865 billion mu of arable land set in the National Land and
10
Space Planning Outline. An increase of 1.3 million mu compared to 2022.
This is vastly different from what is stated in Wikipedia articles. This
error is due to the author's failure to conduct relevant surveys on
changes in China's arable land area during the writing of the article.
Relatively Strong Editor
Although “anyone can edit Wikipedia”, the credibility of the content
written by different editors varies. Without any guarantees, none of the
editors of the “The Green Revolution is fully trustworthy, however, there
are still some relatively credible editors. For example, in the talk view
history, we can find that a user who identifies herself with the user name
“Amuseclio” gave her advice for the paragraph “Agriculture History” by
revising the wording to make the article more precise. She changes the
word “worldwide” to “in parts of the world” to describe the range of
agricultural production. Also, when talking about the consequences of
the Green Revolution, she made the article more comprehensive by
providing a supplement to the negative impact of the Green Revolution
and giving enough sources to prove it. She stated that “ The Green
Revolution had mixed results. Norman Borlaug blamed its failures on
politics. As the development of new cereal varieties through selective
11
breeding reached their limits, some agricultural scientists turned to the
creation of new strains that did not exist in nature, genetically modified
organisms (GMOs), a phenomenon sometimes called the Gene
Revolution. ” Originally, only an introduction of Norman Borlaug who
received the Nobel Peace Prize in the paragraph was provided to explain
the development history of the Green Revolution. After the revision, this
paragraph becomes more overall. This seems to show that this lady pays
great attention to the accuracy and rigor of her analysis to avoid
misunderstanding. On her Wikipedia page, she stated that she used to be
a full professor at a research university, and is now retired from
teaching. As a veteran editor of Wikipedia, she has attempted to
“improve the inaccuracy of WP articles” and has edited the Wikipedia
relates to the history of Latin America such as “Roman Catholicism in
Mexico”, “Alexander von Humboldt-Ninney”, and “Historiography of
Colonial Spanish America”. All of these pages discussing highly academic
subjects show that “Amuseclio” appears to have received extensive
education and professional learning about history and her certification as
a veteran editor could be a strong certification that shows she is a
credible editor to edit the history part of the “Green Revolution”
Wikipedia.
Less Qualified Editor
12
Also, on the talk page of “The Green Revolution”, there is a user who
uses “Chiswick Chap” as his user name gives his suggestion on revision
that in the China part of the Green Revolution that the author doesn’t
give any negative Green Revolution voice in the article. To prove his
viewpoint, “Chiswick Chap” lists many sources that could be
incorporated into the article. At the end of the POV part, he added “There
is some critical material in the main text perhaps moved out of the
deprecated 'Criticism' section. There is therefore a danger of duplication
if materials are added to 'Criticism' or 'Responses' or whatever. We need
to remove the section altogether and apply the new sources wherever
they fit in the main text.” At the end of the page, he provided many links
to resources that proved his point of view. This seems to show that he is
very cautious in deleting the content of the article and he follows
Wikipedia’s editing rule as much as possible. On his own Wikipedia page,
he clarifies that his real name is Ian Alexander and explains that in his
handle, “Chiswick” is a place name and “Chap” means man At the same
time, he states that he has to some extent specialized in biology articles
including, evolutionary biology along with its history. It shows that
“Chiswick Chap” has received a high-level education. He also had the
third rank among those who had created the “Most Good Article” on 17
October 2021. Also, he is classified as a Wikipedia Good Article
13
contributor and Wikipedia Featured Article contributor. This proves that
he has sufficient editing experience.
Editor with No Apparent Qualifications
But not every editor on Wikipedia has such high qualities and abilities
as these two users. Most of the editors on Wikipedia don’t have any
authentication or identity information and these incredible users edit
most of the article and do not need to be responsible for their work. For
example, on the talk page of “The Green Revolution”, a user named
“176.106.33.167” states that “China part of the article reads like
something taken directly from the Chinese official propaganda textbooks.
And not new ones, considering such peculiarities like the "Agrarian
Reform Law of 1950, which ended private land ownership and gave land
back to the peasants" - which is self-contradictory. Also suggesting that
the Great Leap Forward was beneficial for food security in China, when
in reality it caused one of the greatest famines in history, reads like a
morbid joke. Or an official Maoist propaganda, take your pick.” This is a
very trenchant passage of text points out that the article doesn’t
comprehensively analyze the real situation of agriculture development
during the Great Leap Forward, which violates the regulation for editors
on Wikipedia. The sharper the criticism, the more reliable source is
needed. However, when I click the open this user’s Wikipedia user page,
it says that “This is the contributions page for an IP user, identified by
14
the user's IP address.” It means that we can not learn anything relates to
this editor through the Wikipedia channel.
Conclusion
The Green Revolution boosted the modern agricultural development
through the inventions of chemicals used in planting like pesticide and
fertilizers and the promotion of heavy-duty farm machinery from
developed countries to developing countries.
We cannot deny that Wikipedia provides people with a very
convenient and diverse way of acquiring knowledge. However, the harm
that this imprecise knowledge encyclopedia brings to society cannot be
ignored. All of the weak sources, erroneous claims, and incredible editors
make Wikipedia can not be trusted when people need to make crucial
decisions. When I want to do research relating to the Green Revolution, I
would choose to use websites like the Britannica encyclopedia, Internet
Archive, or other professional ones to seek credible sources to help me
understand the history of the Green Revolution.The green revolution is
an important stage in the history of modern agricultural development
that greatly promotes the in-depth development of modern agriculture
through the use of science and technology. Fertilizers and pesticides
have increased the yield of agriculture, while the application of large-
scale agricultural machinery has significantly improved the efficiency of
agricultural production. As a pillar industry for human survival and
15
development, agriculture has also achieved modernization. In this
process, the Green Revolution has indeed caused irreversible damage to
the natural environment. Water source pollution, soil erosion, and
increased carbon dioxide emissions are conclusive evidence. The soil
degradation caused by the uncontrolled use of fertilizers to increase yield
per acre is an irreversible result for humanity, but without the Green
Revolution, you and I may not have had the opportunity to discuss its
significance to society here. Those poor people who have eaten due to the
Green Revolution will be grateful for cheaper food. Filling everyone's
stomach can be a common wish of humanity, and the Green Revolution
has given people more opportunities to fulfill their wishes. We cannot
simply define the green revolution. But we have at least gained the
benefits that the Green Revolution has brought to us.
16
Ally Luo
April 12, 2024
Delta 25
References
"About Us," Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST),
accessed
February 28, 2024, https://post.parliament.uk/about-us/.
Dewald Kirsten. “Wide angle image of a crop spray machine spraying
chemicals on
wheat crop on a farm in south africa.” 10 Nov 2020. shutterstock.
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/wide-angle-image-crop-
spray-machine-
1850978332
Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School. "Our
World in Data."Accessed: February 27, 2024.
https://www.inet.ox.ac.uk/projects/our-world-in-data/.
Jan Willem Erisman, "Nitrogen oxides: emission sources, effects and
management options," Nature Geoscience 1, no. 5 (2008): 290-91,
accessed February 28, 2024,
https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo325.
Jan Willem Erisman, "Nitrogen oxides: emission sources, effects and
management options," Nature Geoscience 1, no. 5 (2008): 290-91,
accessed February 28, 2024, https://web.archive.org/web
17
Jan Willem Erisman's profile page, accessed February 28, 2024,
https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/en/staffmembers/jan-willem-
erisman#tab-1.
James G. Anderson's profile page, accessed February 28, 2024,
https://evsc.as.virginia.edu/people/profile/jng.
Jonathan Wentworth, "Page 8," POST, accessed February 28, 2024,
https://post.parliament.uk/authors/jonathan-wentworth/page/8/.
Jonny Wentworth, LinkedIn profile, accessed February 28, 2024,
https://www.linkedin.com/in/jonny-wentworth-378a4139/.
Mark Sutton's profile page, accessed February 28, 2024,
https://www.ceh.ac.uk/staff/mark-sutton.
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of the People's Republic of
China. "2023
中国农业农村发展成就和 2024 年工作要点" [2023 China Agricultural and
Rural Development Achievements and 2024 Work Points]. Accessed
March 1,
2024.
http://www.moa.gov.cn/ztzl/ymksn/rmrbbd/202403/
t20240301_6449388.htm.
"Net Zero: the UK's contribution to stopping global warming," House of
Commons Library, accessed February 28, 2024,
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/POST-PN-
0710/POST-PN-0710.pd
Oxford Martin Programme on Global Development. "Our World in Data."
Harvard
University. Accessed: February 27, 2024.
https://repository.gheli.harvard.edu/repository/12126/.
Our World in Data. "Team." Accessed February 27, 2024.
https://ourworldindata.org/team#dr-hannah-ritchie.
Our World in Data. "Yields vs. land use: How has the world produced
enough food for a growing population?" Accessed February 27, 2024.
https://ourworldindata.org/yields-vs-land-use-how-has-the-world-
produced-enough-food-for-a-growing-population.
18
Ritchie, Hannah. "Profile." Oxford Martin School. Accessed: February 27,
2024.
https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/people/dr-hannah-ritchie/.
Ritchie, Hannah. "Homepage." Accessed: February 27, 2024.
https://hannahritchie.com/.
Symiah Barnett. “Overall fertiliser use (kg/ha) on all crops and grass,
Great Britain 1983-2017.” November 2018. POST.
https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/POST-PN-
0589/POST-PN-0589.pdf
Wilfried Winiwarter's profile page, accessed February 28, 2024,
https://iiasa.ac.at/staff/wilfried-winiwarter.
"国务院关于印发国家土地空间规划纲要的通知" [Notice of the State Council on
Printing and Distributing the National Land and Space Planning
Outline].
Accessed April 17, 2023.
https://www.gov.cn/yaowen/2023-04/17/content_5751795.htm.
