Your recent editing history at Pesticide shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. General Ization ^Talk 15:52, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss the proposed change on the article's Talk page. Do not repeatedly assert your edit. General Ization ^Talk 15:53, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"I will withdraw it when I am given a valid reason. In accordance with the rules of wikipedia." That's not how things work here. General Ization ^Talk 15:57, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Modification3 reported by User:General Ization (Result: ). Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 15:58, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Respond to the report at WP:EWN. The more you continue to revert, the longer your block is likely to be. General Ization ^Talk 16:04, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for block evasion.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://la1ere.francetvinfo.fr/martinique/l-elimination-des-pesticides-dans-l-agriculture-un-combat-de-longue-haleine-1010254.html

Eliminating pesticides in agriculture, a long-term struggle.[edit]

The 9th edition of the March against agrochemistry on Saturday, May 15, 2021 throughout France and Martinique, highlighted the imperative of a return to healthy agriculture. A message that has found an increasingly growing echo for a decade.

____

Agrochemistry kills. This is the main message declaimed during the ninth edition of the day of action against the Monsanto-Bayer firm. This multinational is the world leader in the production of phytosanitary products. It owes nothing to chance that she was chosen as a symbol of the blemishes of deadly industrial agriculture.

In several cities in France and at home, the demonstrators wanted to carry another message: another type of agriculture is possible and desired. The future of the planet and its people are at stake. These simple ideas have been rehashed for a good decade around the world by environmental and humanitarian activists. And also by farmers and of course, by citizens.

They claim that we are reaching the limits of the logic of industrial agriculture of producing larger quantities of food to feed more and more people. This causes farmers to use all kinds of chemicals on a massive scale, and therefore toxic, to increase yields beyond what natural cycles offer.

____

Who says pesticides says race for profit.

The massive use of plant protection products leads to the search for benefits at all costs. This implies the expansion of agricultural areas through capitalist concentration, the reduction in the number of peasants and agricultural workers. Gradually, the landscapes are transformed and the rural exodus intensifies. In order to survive, the farmer becomes an industrialist.

In poor countries, territories are specialized in places of production of food for export. Soybeans in Brazil, green beans in Burkina Faso, bananas in Central America and the West Indies. These products are not consumed where they are grown. We know that the pesticides used there are harmful to human health. We are living the bitter experience, in Guadeloupe and Martinique, with chlordecone.

____

The return to the vocation of agriculture ?

Another agriculture is desirable, also chanted the participants in the march. The peasant has always fed his family, his neighbors, his land, his country. Today, he is asked to produce to enrich others, including agrochemical companies. Fortunately, there is a slow return to food agriculture on all continents.

During this march against agrochemistry, there has been much talk of returning to the human dimension of agriculture. In particular by moving towards food self-sufficiency. And therefore political autonomy. The debate is open.

It is no coincidence that this year, much attention has been given to ongoing or completed legal proceedings. Here and elsewhere, many victims of agrochemical companies demand reparations for the damages suffered. A fight that will pay off in the end, if another world is possible and desirable.

"The real one doesn't need to be explained."

.. This will not prevent a gradual transformation.