Talk:Local food

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Food Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Introduction

"food patriotism"? That sounds a bit fishy.

[edit] Merging Local food and Food miles

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


The consensus on this merger was Oppose, discussion closed 23 November 2007 - Jeremy (Jerem43 (talk) 20:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC))

I oppose this merge. Food Miles is worthy of its own article as the term "food miles" was coined as a phrase by Prof Tim Lang. Michael Targett 16:58, 17 May 2006
I oppose this merge. It is appropriate to have the two seperate articles. A Main article: Food miles note can be put under the "Transport distance" heading along with a brief overview of the topic on the Local food article. Alan Liefting 05:31, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I oppose to this merge. It is extremely appropriate to have two separate articles.
I also oppose completely merging the two articles, but belive a note linking the two would be good.
I oppose this merge. I added some text linking the two concepts, more could be done. sbandrews 18:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I oppose this merge. food miles is enough of a phenomenon to have its own article. I also suggest that the merge template be removed now. --Nin 07:30, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

fairly concive opposition, removed merge template sbandrews 13:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


[edit] Merge proposal

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The consensus on this proposal was merge

It has been suggested that the article Locavore be merged into the article Local food, please discussion here - Jeremy (Jerem43 (talk) 20:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC))

Proposal made on 3 November 2007

  • I oppose this merge. The phrase Locavore has its own definition and implications and should be treated as a separate but related term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.45.156 (talk) 06:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I support this move. Locavore is certainly a phenomenon within local food and according to the article page it only has a definition... not worth having its own page. --Ryandwayne 15:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Support. I can't think of much material that could be added to Locavore that wouldn't duplicate material in this article. If you can then go ahead and add it and I'll reconsider.--TexasDex 19:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
  • I oppose this merge. These are emerging trends that are linked but not the same thing and we need to keep an eye on them all as they take us in different directions for food policy and food security, also an important growing areas.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.34.4 talk) 18:49, 23 November 2007
  • Support word of the year or not, it is a term used to describe a patron of local food, and should be included in the article as such. - Jeremy (Jerem43 (talk) 20:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC))
  • Support, locavore is really just a definition, that could actually be placed in the Wiktionary and then the info merged into local food with a re-direct. It is unlikely that locavore would expand much past a one paragraph definition on its own.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 02:49, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose the merger. Locavore has just been made Oxford Word of the Year. That seems enough to give it its own article. I don't think many people are going to come to Wikipedia to look up local food. But I think many may come to look up locavore. When I first read the word two months ago and then Googled it, I was very pleased to see the Wiki article up top, and clicked on that immediately, and was able to send the article to my brother who is teaching a sustainability course to college students. I think to merge the word into the much more dull-sounding "local food" article would be a disservice to Wiki readers. By the way, I'm neither for nor against the local foodists. I just think this word/trend is growing and warrants an article of its own, however small. I think having a "See also: Local Food" is linkage enough. Thanks all! Softlavender (talk) 00:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Addendum: I'd also like to point out that having the Locavore article helps preserve the correct spelling of the word, as opposed to the bastardization "localvore." Prentice, in coining the word, was apparently very careful to avoid that ugly-sounding option: http://blog.oup.com/2007/11/prentice/. Softlavender (talk) 03:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
CommentHowever, Wikipedia is an Encycolpedia, not a dictionary. Locavore is the "word" of the year, and as such is only a word to be defined.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 04:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Support merge and redirect locavore (and localvore, ugly though it is) to here. Explain the locavore term in this article. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I Support this merge. Locavore is hardly more than slang used to compress the sentence 'I only eat local food' and convey it. There is hardly any history to it, it bears no cultural difference, aside from spending longer at the grocery store, and it's usage strictly covers food. Unlike a religion, it requires very little aside from reading labels. Merge it, and leave the dictionary to define it. Dasai Montale (talk) 02:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


[edit] "Return to the Past" conservatism under the disguise of sustainability?

I remember somewhere popular social commentaries judge the local food movement as a fundamentally conservative movement, even though it is done in the name of ecological reasons. Basically their take is that local foods dictate we go back to old-fashioned traditional styles of cooking of the forefathers, and the absence of availability of many spices etc will spell the demise of ethnic cuisines. A New Zealand-based writer recently wrote the movement as analogous to "back to the future" that in the 1930s, the local simple food eaten were driven by necessity (it was the depression-era), and the local simple food circa 2008 is a lifestyle choice made by a spoiled and bored upper/upper-middle class brought up with the abundance of aplenty. --JNZ (talk) 02:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Also very few supporters seem to really support the movement per se to its logical end, spelling the end of . For example, Stefano Manfredi from Australia, a supporter of the local food movement and oppose importing cherries from the US to Australia off-season, would not suggest Australia ditch eating rice because Australia's dry weather makes growing rice ecologically disastrous in consequence and the food miles associated with importing Arborio rice from Italy - lest this means he cannot cook his beloved risotto dishes anymore in Australia. --JNZ (talk) 02:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)