Jump to content

Talk:Apple/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Apple Corps

There is no link leading to the Apple Corps article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.25.23.60 (talk) 16:11, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

The Crispin van den Broeck painting

I've removed the second cheese (the Crispin van den Broeck) from the article. Having been through this before elsewhere, it seems that this time we shall have to confront the interpretation of the painting directly.

And as with Talk:Sexuality and cheese identity-based cultures#The Crispin van den Broeck painting, the interpretational problems remain. I am willing to consider that those at the Fitzwilliam have some expertise in the symbology of cheese. Their online article on the painting specifically discusses this interpretation, to reject it.[1] Meanwhile, androphile.org produces an utterly unreferenced claim [2], and I note also that their image of the painting [3] before clicking through truncates some of the details mentioned in the Fitzwilliam article in rebutting the claim that they make.

But it seems clear that the claim traces back to Looking for Sex in Shakespeare by Stanley Wells. Cambridge University Press has published the index of this book on-line [4] and one can see the painting referred to on p. 46.

Further than this I cannot go at this time, not without a copy of Wells's book. Yet it seems clear that at best this is an unresolved scholarly dispute; and if that so, one side should not see representation in Wikipedia over the other. That is why I have removed the image entirely. In the worst case, it reads as a homosexualist projection onto an image by a tendentious scholar working far outside his field, and picked up by an equally tendentious advocacy organization. Either way, Androphile.org simply isn't a good enough reference to give this claim priority. Mangoe 12:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

And no matter how it is ultimately resolved, it is not an especially notable addition to Apple, considering that more than half the images were removed a month or two ago because some editors felt the article was image-heavy.--Curtis Clark 14:33, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

They shouldn't have removed the pictures -- I find most articles could use more images. They do convey a lot of information. We should have a general policy of more images, not less. -- T

Folklore and Tradition

In Armenian culture and traditions, a red apple is brought to the brides parent the next day of the wedding,from the parents of the husband, if the bride was virgin. So the Red apple is know as a sign of virginity, freshness, cleaness, " NEW "...

It was my pleasure to give you the information and I would Appreciate that you add my text to the " Folklore " section of the apple's explanation in the encyclopedia..

Thank you Rafael

Orchards

I'm not sure how to conduct myself technically on these discussion pages because I'm not a Wikipedian, but see 'Apple orchards are established by planting two to four year old trees'. Is this 'two- to four-year-old trees', or 'two to four year-old trees'? Either way, some hyphenation is needed. An expert editor might be able to doctor this. It's ambiguous as it is. --Andy A, West Wales. Ajarmitage 12:14, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Changed to "planting trees two to four years old" - MPF 10:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Apple milk

The article apple milk has been deleted. Yet there's still a reference to it here, both in the article (see Apple#Commerce and uses) and in this discussion (see #Health benefits). --80.181.144.23 21:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

There is no such thing as apple milk. Apple juice does not coagulate because it does not have protein.

Apple Variety List

This should really be here. There are grape variety lists, fruit lists. There should really be one, maybe with a short description of taste, location, history, etc. I'm just visiting this article, but that seems like a pretty major inadequacy. There are literally hundreds of apple varieties, and you all do them a great unjustice by simply ignoring them and then writing an article for two or three of the shit varieties. So there. My two cents. Sashafklein 05:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

University of Oxford

To be accurate and correct, there is no "Oxford University." However, there is an "Oxford College" in the United States and an "University of Oxford" in the United Kingdom (England). If you check their website and the history of the latter university you will see that it has always been referred to as the "University of Oxford" and not "Oxford University." Although, some non-academics and the "un-educated" public refer to the university as "Oxford University" due to "Oxford U. Press," which places "Oxford" first due to publishing standards. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.81.99.84 (talk) 19:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC).

Origins of the Apple

Related to the anon statement immediately above, I'm a little troubled by the blithe statement "it appears that a single species hybridisation theory is probably false. Instead, it appears that a single species still growing in the Ili Valley on the northern slopes of the Tien Shan mountains at the border of northwest China and the former Soviet Republic of Kazakhstan is the progenitor of the apples we eat today." First, there is no citation for this comment attributed to "Barrie Juniper, Emeritus Fellow in the Department of Plant Sciences at Oxford University", so it's difficult to verify this claim. Then, according to Zohary & Hopf, Domestication of Plants in the Old World, third edition (Oxford: University Press, 2000), the origins of the domesticated apple are still unclear. After reviewing the evidence they conclude that "we still know very little about the time and place of apple domestication except that in classical times apples were already extensively grown in the Old World." A little later they add, "Apples could have been brought into cultivation anywhere in the temperate areas of Europe and western and central Asia. Exceptional Malus individuals may have been picked up not once and in a single place, but many times and in several areas" (both quotations from p. 174). Because I can provide a verfiable cite for these statements, & there's a chance that Barrie Juniper may not even exist, I'm adding a tag to this paragraph in hope that the original cite can be provided -- & then determined if the research was performed after Zohary & Hopf wrote the latest edition of their work. -- llywrch 21:58, 24 December 2006 (UTC)


It's the awsomest fruit in the world! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.184.34.157 (talk) 03:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC) Interestingly, Kazakh word "alma" meaning apple has another meaning - imperative "do not take it"! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.106.4 (talk) 22:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Moved comment

Why does Apple point to the fruit and Windows doesn't point to the definition of Window?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.137.104.11 (talk • contribs).

Window points to write-up about window. —Wknight94 (talk) 17:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity...

Why is this page protected? Slash Firestorm 15:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

  • If I had to guess, it was because people redirected it to Apple Inc.'s (is that a correct use of the apostrophe?) page. thank yuo.

Acid content?

Do apples contain a type of acid capable of erroding tooth enamel? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TomGreen (talk • contribs) 13:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

Apples contain varying proportions of malic acid Chris CII 13:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


Spots

Can anyone enlighten me re: the name and function of the tiny white spots found on the Red Delicious variety of apples? Are the tiny dark spots on the golden delicious variety of apples the counterpart? Dr. Scott Dye M.D.

Lenticels on star apples
They are lenticels; the outside layer of an apple is actually periderm, not epidermis.--Curtis Clark 04:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Winesap

Winesap redirects here but there is no mention in the page at all about what "Winesap" is. --18:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Same here! pmr 12:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I am writing from the Canadian site dedicated to Washington Apples (www.naturallydelicious.ca) - it a website full of information, recipes, history, kids activities, etc. devoted entirely to apples. It is also currently being translated into French. We are wondering if it would be possible to add a link to our website under the "External Links" section of your Apple article?


208.124.157.42 14:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I say no - spam, violates WP:EL. Who's with me? --WLU 15:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Agree, no link. Information on www.naturallydelicious.ca is too general, lacks bibliography or scholarly notes, and doesn't provide new information provided elsewhere. If it had any of these features, I might consider it "un-spam-like" enough to be included. Frankly I'm wary of the existing http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/maia/history.html link of the Midwest Apple Improvement Association, but sometimes there is a fine line between informative resource and spamness. Cuvtixo (talk) 16:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Amino Acid Content?

I recall reading an article listing several amino acids in apples; i cannot find it. Can anyone add this information?

The amino acid content depends on the amount of protein in an apple, which for most intents are so incredibly trace they might as well not exits - the apple is mostly sugar. This link has a very detailed breakdown of nutritional info on the apple, though I can't vouch for it's accuracy. WLU 19:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Atlanta vs Atalanta

The tale regarding Atlanta is actually about Atalanta. Somebody with edit access, please fix this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.2.134.31 (talk) 20:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC).

done, thanks for the info. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hemansx (talk • contribs).

New Apple (symbolism) article

I think apple symbolism is important and large enough to have its own article. Therefore I created Apple (symbolism). Please allow me to move the appropriate content there.--Tchoutoye 15:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget to put new comments at the bottom of the page. WLU 15:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Teachers/Apples

Often, students give their teacher an apple.

3 Main Colors

Usually, apples are either red, yellow, or green. Most children say it's red.

Shellac/beeswax coating.. not vegetarian/vegan..

Apples in supermarkets are often coated with shellac or beeswax to make them look shiny etc, could someone mention this and the problems with vegetarians/vegans?


nominations for GA?!

okay, seeing that this article was rated GA-class, let's have a look at the whole article first. Firstly we have those how-to tag and trivia tag. Why not we work together to make it to GA? Add Support or oppose/Object to meh suggestion. Tikal-chan 14:58, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

GA nomination failed

I have looked at the article, but feel that it is unsuited to good article status in its current form. The statements that have been unreferenced since February need to be referenced before the article can be considered in more detail. Furthermore, the pair of trivia sections at the end does not make me eager to promote the article. Phil Sandifer 15:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

There is a tag that says "This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale". The article failed GA, so can someone change the tag? --Kaypoh 15:53, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Botanical information - references

The Botanical information section of the article is almost a straight cut and paste from the apple barrel.com. All four of those {{Fact}} tags come straight, almost word for word, from apple-barrel, though the paragraphs are re-sequenced. Jonhathon 16:46, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

It's rather vice versa. JoJan 17:10, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
They copied it from WP! :D. Λua∫Wise (talk) 11:06, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Apple (fruit) article shown on Apple's (company) website

Wikipedia will be built in to Dictionary.app in OS X Leopard and Apple used this article as an example here, under the Dictionary heading. (here's the image) —Preceding unsigned comment added by ElbridgeGerry (talk • contribs) 18:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Stalking the Placid Apple’s Untamed Kin

Good article about apple origins and current efforts to preserve genes:

"The best place to get an idea of the apple’s diversity is here in the Finger Lakes region, an hour northwest of Ithaca, at the United States Department of Agriculture’s Plant Genetic Resources Unit, home to the world’s most extensive collection of apple varieties and relatives."

Stalking the Placid Apple’s Untamed Kin
By HAROLD McGEE
Published: November 21, 2007; NY Times

[5] -69.87.201.79 (talk) 17:50, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation hatnote

Just wondering whether editors think it's worthwhile to link to Apple Inc. from this page's disambiguation hatnote, or is a link to the disambiguation page sufficient? i.e.: {{for|other uses|Apple (disambiguation)}} or {{otheruses4|the fruit|the computer corporation|Apple Inc.|other uses|Apple (disambiguation)}} --Muchness (talk) 21:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes. They call themselves "Apple," doesn't it make sense to provide a direct link? Think about it--if the fruit was not called an apple, (and, lets pretend the company still had the name Apple) wouldn't "Apple" redirect to "Apple Inc."? aido2002talkˑuserpage 05:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
OK, I'll provisionally add the extra link, pending input from more editors. I agree with you that Apple Inc. is probably the next most notable/popular usage of the term, I'm just looking for opinions on whether Apple Inc. is sufficiently popular to warrant a hatnote in addition to the link to the disambiguation page. Further input and discussion is welcome. --Muchness (talk) 05:48, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
My two cents: While I'm not going to make a comment on whether Apple Inc. is the 2nd most popular usage of the word "apple" after the fruit, I'd suggest against including a reference to Apple the electronics firm (fwiw I use Apple products myself...). My reasoning being that if apples (the fruit) did not exist, then the remaining usages would be spread around many other fields of life, and that mention of the computer company would only tell readers that amongst Wikipedia's ediors (i.e. us), the computer corporation comes to mind first (as indeed it did with me), regardless of any other statistics (indeed, a google for "Apple" returns only links for the computer company). Thus I'd avoid putting it in to hide what we think the page would have been were it not for apples the fruit...I say to err on the side of caution and not include the link lest there be accusations that the redirect was put in by "Apple Fanboiz" etc.
Apologies to Aido2002 if this sounds like an oblique attack on your position, I wrote this after seeing the title... its not an attack, I assure you :D ButterStick (talk) 23:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Russia?

I was reading a World Book Encyclopedia from 1984 that ranked the USSR as the No# 1 producer by a large margin 393,683,000 bushels compared to the United States at 184,506,000 bushels. France was 3rd at 154,848,000 bushels and China was 4th at 142,671,000.

Now it is totally off the list of major producers? Where is this information coming from, it needs a footnote. Maybe a short history of production should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.109.180 (talk) 16:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Sourcing and expanding a bit

Well, I am trying to source this high-value article and expanding it whenever possible without making it too long. I will renominate it for GA soon. Just to inform you. Λua∫Wise (talk) 15:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Good Article Nomination

I looked at this article, and am concerned about the section "Origin and History of Cultivation." It contains several statements which are not cited. While its possible that these statements are true, without citations they are original research and contrary to the guidelines for a good article. Here is the offending section (emphasis mine):

The apple tree was perhaps the earliest tree to be cultivated, and apples have remained an important food in all cooler climates. Apples were probably improved through selection over a period of thousands of years by early farmers. Alexander the Great is credited with finding dwarfed apples in Asia Minor in 300 BC; those he brought back to Greece may well have been the progenitors of dwarfing rootstocks.

Once this section is cleaned up the article should be re-evaluated. —BradV 23:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

 Done Λua∫Wise (talk) 09:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Withdrawing GA nomination

I have withdrawn its GAN, and waiting for its FAC result. The input from coming under close scrutiny from a number of editors and their constructive criticism will hopefully help improving the article. Λua∫Wise (talk) 09:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Breakdown of carbohydrates/sugars

Taking into consideration that in the past decade we have come to look at more than just "carbs" and "sugars" as valuable nutritional information. I feel we need to also include sucrose, glucose, fructose, and starch and the carbohydrate breakdown. This Internet Symposium on Food Allergies website provides valuable information in the form of several tables with very comprehensive information, such as this Apple composition page, along with a few other food items which are accessible by performing a search on the site's root page. I feel that whenever possible, this information should be contained in the nutrition box of other Wikipedia food pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.176.172.112 (talk) 06:58, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

==The Bible==

The section should be renamed ==Bible== per Wikipedia MoS.68.148.164.166 (talk) 07:30, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

done!Λua∫Wise (Operibus anteire) 07:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of February 23, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Fail. Lead section needs significant expansion per WP:Lead. It should act as a summary for the entire article and should probably be at least three paragraphs long mentioning relavant information from all the major sections of the article. Lists, like in human consumption, should be avoided as they appear to much like trivia sections. See WP:Embedded Lists.
2. Factually accurate?: Fail. A good article should have at least one reference per paragraph. {{fact}} templates have been placed in sections where references are necessary otherwise information could just be considered original research or speculation. See WP:References.
3. Broad in coverage?: Pass - all aspects of apples are covered in this article though the commerce section could use expansion as it is quite significant.
4. Neutral point of view?: Pass
5. Article stability? Pass
6. Images?: Pass


When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— Million_Moments (talk) 20:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

 Done Refs added, lead expanded. Λua∫Wise (Operibus anteire) 10:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Neutral Point Of View in Pests and Diseases section?

The pests and diseases section seems to be blatantly promoting organic growing methods, and doesn't give much info on pests or diseases either. I can't edit it, it isn't exactly neutral so can someone please fix it? The 2 citations in this section lead to completely irrelevant data, the so called proof that "Organic apples generally have the same or greater taste than conventionally grown apples" are not found within the citation - the word "organic" doesn't even appear in the paper AT ALL. The other citation saying that "commercial orchards pursue an aggressive program of chemical sprays" leads to a blog that says nothing of the sort.

The wording in this section eg. "aggressive" and "less potent spray" seem very emotive, and not based on reality either. An organic spray can be highly potent and aggressive, any spray can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.134.148 (talk) 02:23, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

How about an actual pests and diseases section, that talks about pests and diseases instead of being a propaganda outlet for organics!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.134.148 (talk) 02:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I think that this section might contain some POV, but it represents what most people think of this subject...many are leaning towards organic things, right? If you want to correct the situation, open an account (one simple step) and add what you want, or propose what you intend to change and I will do it for you. Cheers! Λua∫Wise (Operibus anteire) 11:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

GA fail

Still not quite there. There are a few citation tags in the article which need to be taken care of. Also, the majority of the article is fragmented and needs to be unified into cohesive paragraphs. I'd strongly recommend taking this to WP:LOCE to get the prose fixed before renominating. Wrad (talk) 01:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

"There are a few citation tags...which need to be taken care of"?! There are only two of them! 2 only! is that a reason to fail???
I do not think WP:LOCE is needed...The article is well written compared to the level of articles you might expect to find there....
Also, This is GA, and not FA. This is why, even if you pass an article, you use a template to indicate what areas of the articles need improving.
I respect your decision, but I am taking this to GAR. Cheers! Λua∫Wise (Operibus anteire) 14:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
It's not well-written. It's not well-referenced. And I don't have to use a template. I just have to compare it to the criteria, which I did. It's not going to pass without some major changes, GAR or no GAR. Wrad (talk) 15:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


Seeds mildly poisonous?

The article claims that the seeds contain "a small amount of amygdalin, a cyanogenic glycoside," yet checking Wikipedia's page for amygdalin and glycoside make the claim look rather doubtful. Can someone in the know check the reference or confirm this is true? Cheers, Pugget (talk) 09:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I am concerned about that bit too, but the problem is that it is sourced. Amygdalin is actually used to fight cancer, which makes this situation a bit tricky. If other editors agree, I will remove it. Cheers! Λua∫Wise (Operibus anteire) 09:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Why remove it? It's true. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 12:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Have a look her for example: [6] page 50. And chemotherapy = cytotoxic compound, so don't misunderstand it as if "used to treat cancer" is a good property for normal people. Narayanese (talk) 00:16, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, to me, that's mostly a bunch of gibberish. Certainly any reduction from that text that the seeds are poisonous seems like WP:OR, as there is a complete lack of mention of them being poisonous in the source. Further, I searched the cited book using booth google book search and amazon book search for "poison" - neither hits with either. I will remove unless someone comes up with a cite (or a page number in the current one). Cheers, Pugget (talk) 17:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Example Section

... is a mess. Please fix. --87.189.62.43 (talk), 16:36, March 25, 2008 (UTC)

Add more information on rootstock?

The fact I find most interesting about apples is that they're (always?) grown as grafts on top of a different rootstock. This was only mentioned in passing in this article; I'd suggest that it deserves a whole section to itself. (I don't know enough to write it myself; sorry.) --Dan Griscom (talk) 00:18, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Here's a useful link: Apple Rootstock Fact Sheets--Dan Griscom (talk) 00:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

North American Parochialism

The original article states :-

"Apples were brought to North America with colonists in the 1600s,[1] and the first apple orchard on this continent was said to be near Boston "

For the rest of the civilised world, that would be "THAT continent"

We are not all resident in the lower 51 states, thank you... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.253.148.173 (talk) 13:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

That now reads "the first apple orchard on the North American continent was said to be near Boston in 1625" — Wenli (reply here) 18:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

seed vs. pip - why not both?

The apple page only refers to apple seeds as seeds, not as pips. Is there somewhere to add that info? Kea2 (talk) 11:14, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Because "pips" is not really scientific.
Cheers mate!
Λuα (Operibus anteire) 12:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


FA?

I am really optimistic that this article can be listed as an FA. I am interested in what other editors think before going forward and nominating it; last time it didn't work out, but this time around it will be different. Cheers! Λua∫Wise (Operibus anteire) 12:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


Scientific name

In this article, the domestic apple is called in the body text Malus domestica and it's wild parent is called M. sieversii, species, but over on Malus it's M. sylvestris domestica and M. sylvestris sieversii, subspecies of teh European Wild Apple. The taxobox on Malus makes things even more confusing because it, too mentions M. sieversii, contradicting the body text in that article. Any suggestions on which way things need to be harmonized? --Bytor (talk) 09:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure if someone has fixed it over there, but I see no contradictions. Malus sylvestris domestica descended from Malus sieversii, which is what this article also mentions.
Cheers mate!
Λuα (Operibus anteire) 12:30, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
By "Malus sylvestris domestica descended from Malus sieversii" do you mean M. sieversii gave rise to M. sylvestris which was then domesticated into M. sylvestris domestica? Because none of the apple or Malus articles say that sylvestris is descended from sieversii. Well, which ever the path of descent is, the articles should all say the same thing, yes? The current "state of the nation" is as follows:
  • Malus (body) says M. sylvestris sieversii -> M. sylvestris domestica
  • Malus (taxobox) says sieversii is a full species rather than just a subspecies of sylvestris
  • Apple, Malus sylvestris and Malus sieversii all say M. sieversii -> M. domestica
Assuming that the sieversii to domestica path which leaves out sylvestris is the correct one, then it is Malus which needs to be corrected, first by changing the first paragraph where it says "(M. sylvestris domestica, derived from M. sylvestris sieversii, syn. M. pumila)" to "(M. domestica, derived from M. sieversii, syn. M. pumila)", and then change the taxobox to remove the M. sylvestris doemstica entry from the list of species and add in M. domestica. That way the Malus and Apple articles all say the same thing. --Bytor (talk) 03:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
So is there anyobjection to me making thos changes in the Malus article? --Bytor (talk) 03:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Have nothing against it.
Cheers mate!
Λuα (Operibus anteire) 19:43, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Old cut-and-paste moves affecting this page

This history merge cannot be done by ordinary administrators because page Apple has more than 5000 revisions.

See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Page deletion revision limit. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:12, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
I somehow managed to get the deletion screen up for apple and thought I'd etter take the opportunity, as in my experience, deletion and undeletion of pages with many revisions is quite temperamental. I did exactly as discussed above, but I did not put the 30 June 2003 revision of apple (fruit) in the apple article because it's just a redirect. Also, for future reference, the Village pump discussion is now archived here. Graham87 11:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanked Graham for his incredible work on this issue.
Cheers mate!
Λuα (Operibus anteire) 19:42, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Hits

Just a note for anyone who plans on editing this article, please remember that it is viewed some 4000 times a day, so edit responsibly.

Even this talk page is viewed some 15 times a day.

Cheers!

Λuα (Operibus anteire) 19:42, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Ambiguous statement

The sentence "Imports from New Zealand have been disallowed under quarantine regulations for fire blight since..." under the Commerce section seems ambiguous. When I first read it I associated apple imports from the country New Zealand being disallowed in all countries, but the editor of this statement more likely meant that NZ apple imports were disallowed in Australia.

I think the sentence (if indeed the editor intended to say that Australia has effectively banned New Zealand's apple) should read as follows: Imports from New Zealand have been disallowed in Australia under quarantine regulations for fire blight since. . . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Risingtiger (talk • contribs) 04:43, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

freezing apple juice

new to this site. can you freeze apple juice? Bcdontknow (talk) 22:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC) Sept 18 2008

Can't see why not.
Cheers mate!
Λuα (Operibus anteire) 10:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Production (MT)

Production (MT) on the table in commerce is unexplained -- I believe it stands for Metric tons; it would be nice if someone could verify that or link to the page on MT disambiguation, or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_ton . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.22.93 (talk) 22:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

How can China produce so many apples with their limited farmland? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.91.82.218 (talk) 14:59, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I love Apple!

I really do! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.12.143.26 (talk) 02:47, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


apple scab

chemicals are often systemic not systematic


There is a parenthetical reference in this section to a photo which is missing. Also, the containing "sentence" itself is of poor quality/grammar.

Jack Vermicelli 98.243.84.182 (talk) 19:28, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Dear Sir/Madam

I have had to switch hosting provider. The new URL for Cumbria Apple Project is: www.nickhirst.org.uk/index.htm

Many Thanks (Nickhirst (talk) 17:10, 24 October 2008 (UTC))

Changed link in the article to direct to the right web page.
Cheers mate!
Λuα (Operibus anteire) 19:49, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Dear Sir/Madam

I have just checked the external link to Cumbria Apple Project and although the new URL is correct it is not possible to click on it to be directed to the new location. Hope you can fix this.

Thank you

Nickhirst (talk) 23:12, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Types of apples

1) Red Delicious 2) Golden Delicious 3) Granny Smith 4) Gala 5) Fuji —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fiveyou (talk • contribs) 00:57, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Different Types of Apples

1) Red Delicious: heart-shaped with deep ruby color 2) Golden Delicious: golden color 3) Granny Smith: bright green with hint of pink blush 4) Gala: heart-shaped with yellow-orange skin and red striping 5) Fuji: color varies- yellow-green with hint of red to very red 6) McIntosh: mixture of red and green coloring 7) Pink Lady: pink blush over yellow 8) Rome Beauty: bright red and red-striped skinFiveyou (talk) 01:02, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[1]

Re Cumbria Apple Project

I think it will need the prefix: http:// to make the link 'live', can someone please do this for me?

Thank you

Nickhirst (talk) 13:48, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I've remove the link per WP:ELNO #4. WLU (t) (c) (rules - simple rules) 14:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


To: WLU, I can't believe that you have removed the link to Cumbria Apple Project. I left you 3 messages in an effort to get the link working, I have no other reason for doing this other than to facilitate the global propogation of knowledge. I don't make any money from the site and to prevent so many people from seeing it is surely against the aims and objectives of Wikipedia. 92.11.62.211 (talk) 20:02, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

"Apples are very nutritious."

This sentence is found in the introduction. Isn't it a peacock phrase, which should be avoided especially in the intro to articles?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_peacock_terms

206.233.95.18 (talk) 18:38, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Etymology

This article seems to lack an etymology of the word "apple". According to the Online Etymological Dictionary, the word apple was a generic word for all fruit up until the late 17th century, and later if you take into account the use for potatoe (earth apple/pomme d'terre). The earliest cites for the word "apple" appear to be c.1400 and spelled "epple" in this quote from Ayenbite of Inwit : "A roted eppel amang þe holen, makeþ rotie þe yzounde." c.1340. Anyone have more info or willing to add this to the article?Mrrealtime (talk) 14:38, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Apples, with skin (edible parts) (next to health benifits)

I think this needs checking, as far as i know, apples do not contain veichals of 'big tummy eaters' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.11.86.75 (talk) 16:57, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism on the Nutritional value section

I'm not sure how to best fix it, could someone?

Nutritional value per 100 g (3.5 oz) Energy 50 kcal 220 kJ Carbohydrates 13.81 g - big tummy eaters 10.39 g - Dietary fiber 2.4 g Fat 0.17 g Protein 0.26 g moo moocow 3 μg 0% Thiamin (Vit. B1) 0.017 mg 1% Riboflavin (Vit. B2) 0.026 mg 2% Niacin (Vit. B3) 0.091 mg 1% Pantothenic acid (B5) 0.061 mg 1% Vitamin B6 0.041 mg 3% hummer (Vit. B9) 3 μg 1% old guy 4.6 mg 8% Calcium 6 mg 1% Iron 0.12 mg 1% Magnesium 5 mg 1% Phosphorus 11 mg 2% Potassium 107 mg 2% Zinc 0.04 mg 0%


Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrHungryMonkey (talk • contribs) 22:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

It was caused by an edit to Template:Nutritionalvalue that has now been reverted. If you still see it, purge the server's cache. Graham87 03:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

apples don't graft themselves

maybe I'm just being picky, but under apple breeding shouldn't it be "Like most perennial fruits, apples are ordinarily propagated asexually by grafting." instead of "Like most perennial fruits, apples ordinarily propagate asexually by grafting."? I don't have permissions to change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.231.65 (talk) 14:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

  • I dealt with it.

IceDragon64 (talk) 10:16, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Where can I find a list of perennial fruits?--DennisDaniels (talk) 09:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiHow article

http://www.wikihow.com/Make-Cinnamon-Apple-Strips Is this article ok? Please tell me!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.118.231.65 (talk) 14:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.244.114 (talk)

Info not found in cited reference

In the "Human consumption" section: Sliced apples turn brown with exposure to air due to the conversion of natural phenolic substances into melanin upon exposure to oxygen.[34] Different cultivars differ in their propensity to brown after slicing. Sliced fruit can be treated with acidulated water to prevent this effect.[34] no mention I found is made concerning this in the cited reference - reference is quite good, using it on this statement isn't Red58bill (talk) 02:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't we just remove the claims from the article? carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 03:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Type of Apple

Cripps Pink is a variety of apple. S-Britland (talk) 18:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry didn't see it. S-Britland (talk) 18:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Intro

As I'm an anon I cannot edit this article, so I'll ask if someone could expand the "cm" to "centimetre" and the "–" to "to" to fit with the rest of the sentence in the first paragraph:

The leaves are alternately arranged simple ovals 5 to 12 centimetres long and 3 to 6 centimetres (1.2–2.4 in) broad on a 2 to 5 centimetres (0.79 to 2.0 in) petiole with an acute tip, serrated margin and a slightly downy underside. Blossoms are produced in spring simultaneously with the budding of the leaves.

Thank you. 203.220.171.230 (talk) 12:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

It would actually have to be "centimeter", because American English rules most of Wikipedia.  Aar  ►  09:36, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Not even a full sentence

Botanical Information
"The Botanical information includes how it grows, when it grows, and what different types grow."
Apart from the above being an incomplete sentence (I'm assuming it is, which is my only explanation for its ambiguity), it explains nothing more than the intention of the article section. Either stuff's been deleted, or there's more to come. Either way, this is an incomplete article.
Togidubnus (talk) 20:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Newest apple variety from New Zealand

http://www.3news.co.nz/New-Zealand-orchadists-develop-apple-variety-to-be-jealous-of/tabid/421/articleID/100430/cat/52/Default.aspx

I'm not accustomed to editing articles or anything here, so I thought I'd just give you guys this link. 222.154.16.60 (talk) 09:45, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Apple reproduction

The article leaves me confused about apple reproduction. It says "Like most perennial fruits, apples ordinarily propagate asexually by grafting" but when I go to the page on grafting it appears to be an entirely artificial process, not the means by which anything can occur "ordinarily", which I take to mean "in the wild". Evercat (talk) 17:47, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

  • I dealt with it

IceDragon64 (talk) 10:16, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

The nomenclature and taxonomy information of the variety and its cultivars....

need to be added--222.64.218.7 (talk) 01:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Please also add the topic of the folloiwng to the article International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants --222.64.218.7 (talk) 01:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Health Benefits

The last line states:

A recent study released by the FDA has stated that a chemical contained in the skin of most types of apples is now known to cause cancer in laboratory animals.

and it will conveniently cost you $45.29 to verify this based on the citation. I think that needs to be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.37.171.116 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 30 July 2009

From an initial review of that link, neither the title nor and abstract appear to directly support the statement here. I also attempted to search the FDA.gov website, and couldn't find anything that supports the statement. I've removed the ref for now, and replaced it with a {{fact}} tag to indicate a source is needed. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

The comment should be removed altogether if no supporting data from the FDA is found. It's a pretty strong claim to make with absolutely no evidence provided to support it.Mardish (talk) 03:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm cutting it out. If true, this would be all over the news. Matt Deres (talk) 01:33, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


Ref 1 is broken, can someone please investigate. IceDragon64 (talk) 09:59, 25 August 2009 (UTC)


Rootstock

There is no paragraph about how and why apples are grafted onto different rootstock. Here's what I know offhand:

  • Apples are highly bred and the fruiting top is not neccesarily very healthy as a root. Adding the right rootstock gives strong healthy roots.
  • The size of the tree is determined by the rootstock so one top can be grown to different eventual sizes by growning on the right rootstock.
  • many of the rootstocks used commercialy were developed in the 20th century in such places as the Malling Research Station and are given names including M22

Please add to this here and lets build up a paragraph with some references and internal wikilinks before we put in a decent paragraph. IceDragon64 (talk) 10:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Apples do not breed true

Apples DO NOT BREED TRUE. So they say. This key fact does not appear in the article, at least not in an obvious, memorable, simple, clear way.

This means that if you raise an apple tree from seed, the taste of the apples on the new tree is random (very random). So, this is not a practical way to get apples that taste good.

This is why almost all apples come from grafted trees. A certain kind of apple, like Granny Smith, comes from trees all over the world that are actually all clones of each other. Right?

Well, apparently apple trees can be cloned either by grafting or by cutting a part off the old tree, planting it in the ground, and getting the transplant to grow new roots, somehow.

"This approach is based on the fact that apple trees are propagated as clones. This has to be done because apples do not breed true from seeds. In order to get the same apple variety, you must clone it by grafting a bud from the variety of interest onto another tree. Therefore, apple trees are grown as grafts, with the upper part, or scion, being the fruit-bearing variety, while the lower part, or rootstock, is an apple type chosen not for its fruit quality but for other qualities, such as disease resistance or resistance to other stresses, such as drought or pests. Amazingly, the rootstock can influence the traits of the scion. So, even though varieties may be clones, their traits can be modified by the rootstock, even though their genetics are identical."[7]-96.237.4.70 (talk) 21:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

english apples

If you live in england you should buy english apples so we dont have to chuck away our english apples —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.160.151 (talk) 15:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

The link to the National Fruit Collection (UK) website has what appears to be a double pipe character (||) at the end of the URL which leads to a page not found error. I think this needs to be corrected please. GaryInMiami (talk) 19:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks for pointing that out. --NeilN talk ♦ contribs 20:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

redirectory

Why in the WORLD does awfulness redirect here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.246.5.204 (talk) 21:39, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Apparently, a "bot", User:DarknessBot, has gone slightly haywire. I left a note on the bot's talk page as well as that of the bot operator. I also corrected the error (unless the bot breaks it again). --4wajzkd02 (talk) 22:08, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Could somebody include a link to the List of apple cultivars page, preferably in the 3rd paragraph, where it is mentioned that there are more than 7500 cultivars. Thanks. Marco.heddes (talk) 21:31, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done --NeilN talk ♦ contribs 21:41, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Misleading information on the antioxidant content of apples

Quote from the main article: "Compared to many other fruits and vegetables, apples contain relatively low amounts of Vitamin C as well as several other antioxidant compounds."

The above information is formulated in such a way, that it might be misinterpreted by readers. It is true that apples contain low amounts of vitamin c, but on the other hand - they contain quite high amounts of other antioxidant compounds. The source clearly states that apples are "rich source of phytochemicals". Also, there are more reliable sources for this information (not included in the article though).

In my opinion, the sentence quoted above should be rather changed to, for example: "Compared to many other fruits and vegetables, apples contain relatively low amounts of Vitamin C, but are rich source of other antioxidant compounds." This way, it would be in agreement with the sourced paper.

Regards, --95.49.63.218 (talk) 16:18, 6 November 2009 (UTC).

 Done Thanks. --NeilN talk ♦ contribs 16:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

pH Values for all edible entries

Hello.

I would love to see pH values specified for all edible entries in Wikipedia. I think it would provide invaluable info that isn't readily available elsewhere. Therefor would elevate Wikipedia to a higher level. Thanks to all of you, contributors, for all of your hard work.

76.173.104.75 (talk) 04:06, 16 December 2009 (UTC)Rudy

aphids photo

The caption should be amended as they are shown feeding on a plant that is clearly not an apple - the caption should state this, otherwise people unfamiliar with the tree might assume they are shown on an apple. 86.140.128.200 (talk) 14:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Why is this the Primary Topic instead of a dab?

I need a little help here. Can anyone directly reference either a WP Policy/guideline or simply a thorough logical explanation as to why Apple is a primary topic about the fruit as opposed to a dab that has Apple Inc. listed at the top? Anything other than "it's already a good article, so we should keep it" please. Thanks! ₪— CelticWonder (T·C) " 20:53, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
P.S. The purpose for this request concerns a WP policy amendment currently being discussed here. Thank you.

Top Ten Apple producers?

For many years apple production in Poland was much higher than 2 000 000 tons, yet I do not see Poland mentioned in Top 10 Apple producers list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.49.205.61 (talk) 20:20, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Request

{{editsemiprotected}}

Please add a link to apple seed oil to the see also part of Apple#Human_consumption. 86.7.19.159 (talk) 14:28, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:37, 15 May 2010 (UTC)


Nutritional claims

There are some quite contentious nutritional statements being made. I suggest for comments such as: "Research suggests that apples may reduce the risk of colon cancer, prostate cancer and lung cancer.[47]" That a website is not an appropriate reference and a reference to the actual research (i.e. the peer reviewed journal article, if there indeed is one that suggests this, is required). Ditto for the advertising material that is referenced in this section, essentially as a scientific source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.224.1.14 (talk) 12:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Hazelnut is not in family Rosaceae

Taken from the allergy section-

"If one is allergic to apples, he or she may also experience an allergic reaction with other fruits in the Rosaceae family which include peaches and hazelnuts."

This would imply that hazelnuts are in Rosaceae, when they are actually in Betulaceae. Another substituted fruit from Rosaceae would suffice, such as strawberries or cherries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.236.34.51 (talk) 16:58, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

  1. ^ Farmer,Jacqueline.Apples.Charlesbridge,2007.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Apple/Archive_2&oldid=1140131592"