Talk:Blueberry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Plants (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.
 C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Food and drink (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles 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.
 C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
 

Archives
Archive 1
Threads older than 100 days may be archived by MiszaBot I.

Contents

[edit] Untitled

Perhaps other blueberries native to the Americas such as Sparkleberry (Vaccinium arboreum), Vaccinium constablaei, Darrow's Evergreen Blueberry, Highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum), Rabbiteye blueberry (Vaccinium ashei), Lowbush blueberry (Vaccinium angustifolium) should be mentioned? The article mentions US blueberries, but doesn't specify the species. // Liftarn

[edit] Blueberry Bloom

Would someone please add a section describing the makeup and function of the whitish bloom that coats ripe blueberries? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radcen (talkcontribs) 14:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

[edit] Chandler blueberry

I created the article Chandler blueberry. Any improvements would be welcome. Please see Talk:Chandler blueberry as well. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 18:32, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


[edit] Potential references

From [1]. See discussion: --Ronz (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


Thank you for your opinion and suggestion.

These reviews are meant for readers who would like to delve deeper into the subject. The reviews are placed in the “further reading” – section because the Wikipedia guideline for this section read: “… publications that would help interested readers learn more about the article subject. The Further reading section (…) should normally not duplicate the content of the References section” (WP:FURTHER).

The Wikipedia content guideline for “Identifying reliable sources (medicine)” (WP:MEDRS) read: “It is usually best to use reviews and meta-analyses where possible.”

The reviews in question (at least one of them) reflect the latest research (last 10 years) in the field, they are scholarly and peer-reviewed, and they are published in academic journals. Granateple (talk) 22:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export