Talk:Sugar Mountain Farm

Request edit on 18 December 2015

user 71.54.193.172 edited the article to remove a reference from a source without offering a cite or source to support their edit. I'd like to see the text revert to the previous version that is supported by the source.

This edit

directly contradicts the statement in this source Bruceki (talk) 21:35, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

References

I don't know who 71.54.193.172 is but the fact is Sugar Mountain Farm does not pasture males and females separately. Males and females are kept together. I have specifically stated many times that we don't separate males and females. See: http://sugarmtnfarm.com/2012/03/23/have-your-pig-and-eat-it-too/ I should know since I am the owner of Sugar Mountain Farm. The edit should not be reverted. Pubwvj (talk) 23:54, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

pubwvj: one way to resolve that is to provide a reliable source that supports the edit by 71.54.193.172. The editors of modernfarmer.com presumably did their fact checking on their article and you've had ample time to get them to correct or retract any error in their publication. I think that the rule is to be correct to the source; if you feel the source is incorrect in some way find another reliable source that supports your view and ask that someone edit it in, as I have here.

Do you believe that the article itself or modernfarmer.com in general is not a reliable source? Bruceki (talk) 01:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

The source says "such as...(list)" as does the article. If there is a later source that says they are not pasturing separately we can cite it and say they stopped. Or, if that article is in error and they never pastured separately we might be able to remove the source and all material it is used to support however we at least must have another source that says "such as (list not including pastured separately)" - even then I suggest discussing it as WP:RSN. In cases of reliable source vs a statement by a COI editor the material in the reliable source is what we will report 99 times out of 100 and this is not the kind of thing covered in the '1'. Jbh^Talk 19:01, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Update 2019-02-06

@Jbhunley: Please add USDA Inspected as of May 1st 2018, correct farm size and other details: USDA Inspected as of May 1st 2018. Article in WEC newspaper about butcher shop construction and thermal efficiency: http://www.washingtonelectric.coop/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Oct2018.pdf

Acreage of farm is listed as 70 acres here on Wiki. Farm is approximately 1,000 acres of which most is forest land - farm also does sustainable forestry. About 70 acres is pasture land. Article in AcresUSA magazine https://www.acresusa.com/collections/back-issues/products/december-2018-issue-pdf

-Walter Jeffries — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.21.140.148 (talk) 23:35, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Reply 7-FEB-2019

  Edit request partially implemented  

1. N The reference for USDA inspection ought to originate from the US Department of Agriculture.
2. N The statement regarding 'thermal efficiency' is not a proposed, actionable claim statement that can be reviewed. Please state your requests in the form of Please change x to y.
3. Y The claim regarding the farm's acreage was added under the infobox's |remarks= parameter.

Regards,  Spintendo  11:30, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Update 2019-02-07

@Jbhunley: @Spintendo: Here is a link to the USDA list of meat processing plants (e.g., butcher shops and such). Sugar Mountain Farm is listed. This list comes directly from the USDA web site: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/bf8d9766-9767-4e0c-a9f1-efea0b2a42bc/MPI_Directory_Establishment_Name.pdf?MOD=AJPERES Once in that document search for Sugar Mountain Farm to find the entry. It is USDA establishment M46195.

The thermal efficiency could be phrased as:

"The building is engineered and built as six shells each insulated from the outside to provide a total of 1.6 million pounds of thermal mass which cycles the cold of winter to the warm season of summer and warmth of summer to the cold season of winter using thermal mass heat storage. The plant received USDA licensing May 1st of 2018 without any heating or cooling system for the building."

This is the point of the WEC article at - the utility company was interested in the thermal efficiency as it reduces energy consumption and makes for a greener building with a lower carbon footprint: http://www.washingtonelectric.coop/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Oct2018.pdf

Thank you,

-Walter Jeffries

PS. The AcresUSA Magazine article also correctly states that we do not separate by sex - the Wiki article is in error about this. I've tried to point this out before. I should know since I'm the farmer. I realize you want some things backed up by documentation such as the USDA inspection but there are other things where you could take into account the word of the person doing it. Just because I'm the person doesn't mean there is any conflict of interest. I stick to facts. Something else that is vaguely confusing in the Wiki article is it says 2010 in one paragraph but that makes it sound like maybe we started in 2010. By 2010 we had been raising and selling for a long time (the 12 generations). It might help clarify it if the following preceeds the start of that sentence: "The farm had previously done forestry, sugar mapling, sheep, chickens and ducks and then in 2003 began raising pigs." I think that would be more clear, more exact, more informative and make the following sentence about 2010 make more sense. -W @Jbhunley: @Spintendo:

Hello, could someone address / make the edits above? -W 20190306 @Jbhunley: @Spintendo:

 Mr. Jefferies is interviewed in the WEC article and describes what he wants his building to be when it is completed, but admits in the article that it's not completed, and has no scheduled completion date.  Since it's taken him more than 10 years to get to this incomplete state, I'm not sure that he will complete his plans in the lifespan that he has remaining.  I don't know that aspirational plans should be noted in the same way as completed plans, and since the publication, and mr. jefferies both agree that this is a work in progress it seems reasonable to wait until whatever feature is completed before adding it to the article.  
 With respect to Mr. Jefferies other claims, he states that his farm started in 2003, and by 2010 he had 12 generations of pigs produced.  A pig can become pregnant at 6 months of age, the gestation period is about 4 months, and that puts a minimum timeframe for each generation of pigs at 10 months if they are bred as fast as possible.  He's claiming 12 generations in a timeframe that could at best have produced 8.  In the same breath he claims that he "only sticks to the facts".  In other words, take his direct statements with a bit of skepticism - he is a COI editor of this piece after all.  Bruceki (talk) 01:28, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

2019 great pig escape - COI edit request

Here's a number of links related to a great pig escape at sugar mountain farm, and apparently fines that are approaching $150,000. Respecting my COI status, I cannot add a section to this page, but I'd like to see this added in some form as it relates to the operation of the farm and was newsworthy enough to make the national news for two weeks.

Bruceki (talk) 20:48, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Reply 28-OCT-2019

  Specification requested  

• It is not known what changes are requested to be made. Please state your desired changes in the form of "Change x to y using z".

Change x to y using z

x A verbatim description of the old text to be removed from the article (if any) y A verbatim description of the new text to be added to the article (if any) z A reference which verifies the requested change Example edit request: Please change: The Sun's diameter is 25 miles. ↑ This is x ↑ to read as: The Sun's diameter is 864,337 miles. ↑ This is y ↑ using as a reference: Harinath, Paramjit (2019). The Sun. Academic Press. p. 1. ↑ This is z ↑

Kindly open a new edit request at your earliest convenience when ready to proceed.
Regards,  Spintendo  01:41, 29 October 2019 (UTC)