Talk:Thomas Robert Malthus

This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:Biography: Science and Academia / Core

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is listed on the project's core biographies page.

Economics High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

History of Science High‑importance

	This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content 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. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Philosophers / Social and political / Modern Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Associated task forces: /  Philosophers Social and political philosophy Modern philosophy

Surrey Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Surrey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Surrey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Malthus and the "World Wide Population of Flies".

Forty years ago our then Science Teacher told us, whilst discussing population dynamics, that Malthus estimated that there had been so many flies on the planet that if they had not decomposed, their bodies would have covered the entire planet in a layer some ten metres high. This particularly gross image has stayed with me throughout the decade.

Corn Laws

It seems the section on Corn Laws in the lede is contradictory. Here's what it reads "He supported taxes on grain imports (the Corn Laws), because food security was more important than maximizing wealth". It seems like decreasing taxes would lead to better food security, not raising it.72.76.83.63 (talk) 00:42, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, he was horrifically wrong on this, like almost everything else this clown ever wrote. I'm genuinely disappointed in this wikipedia article for not being clearer that this guy was one of the most wrong people in history, along with Marx et.al. Aujoz (talk) 20:54, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

The Corn Laws protected farms in Britain to operate even if food was more expensive for consumers--it allowed Britain to mostly feed itself without relying on shipping that could be cut off in wartime (as nearly happened in 1861, WWI and WW2). Rjensen (talk) 20:59, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Article being vandalized/trolled

This article has a lot of trolled/vandalized edits in it, it should be protected so that not everyone can edit it. I can't tell which information in it is authentic or not. It needs a review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.187.82.143 (talk) 10:44, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

This article is a mess

Especially the section on "The Malthusian controversy", which appears to be original research and is full of [number] that aren't actual footnotes. -- Jibal (talk) 21:16, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

@Jibal agreed100%, came here to post the same thing. Sasubpar (talk) 03:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Went through and fixed the footnotes -- it looks like there were originally citations but they were never properly hyperlinked. (I'm guessing it was plain-text copy-pasted from another article at some point.) Agree it still reads very much like someone's essay and needs some serious editing. Moriwen (talk) 01:04, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

The grammar is so confusing in the article too. Like I cannot understand what certain sentences mean because of the way it’s phrased. Rhayailaina (talk) 09:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)