Talk:Blueberry
| This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| This article may be expanded with text translated from the corresponding article in the German Wikipedia. Click [show] on the right for instructions.
|
Archives |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| 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 (talk • contribs) 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 (talk • contribs) 18:32, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
[edit] Potential references
From [1]. See discussion: --Ronz (talk) 18:15, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- Routray, W. / Orsat, V. “Blueberries and Their Anthocyanins: Factors Affecting Biosynthesis and Properties”, Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety (2011),10(6):303-320.
- Wood, M. “Blueberries and Your Health”, Agricultural Research Magazine (2011), May – June:9-13. (U.S. Dept. of Agriculture)
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)