Talk:Vanilla

Errors in figures under "2009 Top Vanilla Producers"

These percentages don't appear to be correct. No way can French Polynesia have the same percentage as Mexico when their outputs are nearly an order of magnitude apart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.234.214.143 (talk) 23:10, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Hernán Cortés - really?

"Originally cultivated by Pre-Columbian Mesoamerican peoples, Spanish conquistador Hernán Cortés is credited with introducing both the spice and chocolate to Europe in the 1520s" -- are we sure? Neither the vanilla nor chocolate page lists Hernan, and indeed, the history of chocolate page lists columbus as the introducer. Can someone verify this or remove it pls? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.102.79.49 (talk) 02:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Totonac tribe were first to cultivate vanilla, not the Aztecs

The article implies that the Aztecs were first MesoAmericans to cultivate vanilla. This is WRONG. The earlier Totonac people were first and they later sold it to the Mayas and later to their successors, the Aztecs learned to cultivate it, ended up annexing the Totonac lands and joining the violent Spanish invaders led by Herman Cortes to fight for the Aztec Empire of Moctezuma II. --208.54.70.153 (talk) 19:36, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Dubious

The assertion that Tahitian vanilla is a separate species is dubious. The citation given is not scientific, the Encyclopedia of Life does not list "Vanilla tahitensis" as a species, and even the Wikipedia article Vanilla (orchid) does not list it as a species. I suspect that there is cultural or commercial interest in distinguishing Tahitian vanilla as a species, but there must be scientific evidence to support it. ENeville (talk) 17:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Harmful or beneficial?

Is vanilla or vanillin good for you or not? Any known health risks? 80.0.97.97 (talk) 01:07, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Vanilla/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

This article does not meet the Good article criteria and has therefore failed. Issues include:

• The lead is too short. Please expand it to at least three paragraphs or so per WP:LEAD.
• Web references should be formatted per WP:CITE/ES to include access date and publisher information.
• here is a "dubious" tag in the article.
• A significant amount of information goes unreferenced per WP:CITE, including but not limited to:
  • Most of the "Vanilla orchid" section
  • Second and second-last paragraph of the " History" section
  • Second paragraph of the " Chemistry" section
  • Second paragraph of the "General production guidelines" section
  • Second paragraph of the "Pest and disease management" section
  • From the third to the last points in the "Stages of production" section
  • And so on
• Several references are placed improperly; there should be no spaces between punctuation marks and references. For example, "vine.[16] [17] In" should be "vine.[16][17] In"

Once these issues have been resolved, please ensure that the article meets the Good article criteria laid out at WP:GA? and then renominate it. Gary King (talk) 21:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Please restore the spelling dialect per WP:ENGVAR, so that I do not have to do it a second time in one day. The article uses British English, the dialect it was started with. VMS Mosaic (talk) 20:14, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

You didn't have to change it in the first place, there was a smattering of both dialects throughout the article before I started editing. I was correcting this as I edited, choosing the American English dialect as I am American; then you came along and changed all the American English to British English and undid the changes I had begun.

Additionally, the sources I have located, as well as most of the ones already in place, use the American dialect. I wish to keep everything standardized. That is why I started using the American dialect. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 00:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC), amended 05:14, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Have you read WP:ENGVAR? I prefer using American (being one), but this article uses British (please see the first edit). I will change it back when I have some time later today. VMS Mosaic (talk) 17:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually I have, specifically this part:

If an article has evolved using predominantly one variety, the whole article should conform to that variety, unless there are reasons for changing it on the basis of strong national ties to the topic. In the early stages of writing an article, the variety chosen by the first major contributor to the article should be used, unless there is reason to change it on the basis of strong national ties to the topic. Where an article that is not a stub shows no signs of which variety it is written in, the first person to make an edit that disambiguates the variety is equivalent to the first major contributor.

While the initial entry was in British English, it was a stub. The first major contributor Peter G Werner used American English. Before that point there was no preferences, and it was a hodge-podge of both. One other contributor that made any significant contributions was Anskrev only made layout changes. Peter G. Warner is the first person to make an edit that disambiguates the variety. Additionally, there are no major national ties binding a particular version of English to the article. The closest would be Mexico where vanilla originated; when using English, Mexico tends to use American English predominantly (Translations, etc).

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 21:16, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I have been monitoring this article for WP:ENGVAR since 5/10/07 when I found one word with American spelling. I made additional WP:ENGVAR edits on 6/13/07, 6/30/07, 7/17/07, 12/8/07, 1/23/08 and 3/12/08. Unfortunately I missed the edit on 5/26/08 where some American spellings were introduced (another editor corrected some of the spellings which is why I probably missed the rest). If I had not missed those edits, you would have found an article with no American spellings when you started your GA editing.

If I hadn't screwed up, you would have no reason to change the spelling. Per WP:MOS "It is inappropriate for an editor to change an article from one style to another unless there is a substantial reason to do so; for example, it is unacceptable to change from American to British spellings unless the article concerns a British topic." The subsections of WP:ENGVAR are for use when an article is found without a consistent style which this article would have had except for my mistake. Going back in the history to find an excuse to change the current style is not a valid use of WP:ENGVAR. If you want to take advantage of a recent editing mistake on my part, then I will not continue to argue the issue. VMS Mosaic (talk) 22:35, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Language expresion: "Plain Vanilla" and Adulteration of Vanilla sections should be added to this article

I am not an English native speaker. I have seen the expression Plain Vanilla meaning something like the basic version to which other flavours will be added. This expression is used in many computer science books in phrases like: the plain vanilla compiler, plain vanilla language. I think it is important to include a section linking idiomatic expressions with vanilla to their appropriate entries containing the complete etymological origin.

I liked this article why not? Vanilla among chocolate is a favourite flavour in the world. :)

I should say that it is an extended practice of unhonest merchants in Mexico to put vanilla pods in alcohol to extract the essence they sell the pod and keep the alcohol with the extract to sell apart. In that case vanilla has a very weak taste. I think it is important to include an adulteration of vanilla section in this article an other about other spices. I maybe take a picture of this practice the next time that I see it and upload it here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elias (talk • contribs) 10:09, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Mexican/Madagascar vanilla production quantities disagree

1) In the History section, last para: "Mexico, once the leading producer of natural vanilla with an annual 500 tons, produced only 10 tons of vanilla in 2006". In the Culinary Uses section, the table "2006 Top Vanilla Producers" gives the Mexican Production as 350 tonnes. A casual survey of other web pages gave varying production quantities for Mexican vanilla but are generally closer to the figure given in the History section.

2) In the Culinary Uses section, the table "2006 Top Vanilla Producers" gives the Mexican Production as 350 tonnes. The external FAO link (below graph) gives Mexican 2006 vanilla Production Quantity as 291 tonnes.

3) Similar disparities to 2) also arise between the Wikipedia table and the FAO stats for other countries (eg Madagascar - 6200 and 2534 respctively).

Either a correction or a clarification is needed (but perhaps not by me - approx 99% of what I know about vanilla has been learned in the last 10 minutes).

Oniscoid (talk) 12:13, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Adding to Oniscoid's note: I observe that History pp. 3 begins with the claim "Madagascar is now responsible for 97% of the world's vanilla bean production," and History pp. 5 with the contradictory claim "Madagascar (mostly the fertile region of Sava) accounts for half of the global production of vanilla." The first claim is sourced to what looks like a 12-year-old article on HerbalGram, a website that appears to advocate for herbal medicinals, so I'd question its validity as an RS. The second is sourced to a completely nonexistent website. (It may have existed at one time; the domain name is no longer registered, however.)

I would suggest removing both claims of production percentages, as neither source appears to be both reliable and verifiable. The corresponding claims in the Madagascar article merely state that Madagascar is the world's leading producer, responsible for "about half the world's export market." I suggest that this article be reworded to match that statement, unless somebody can find a real RS, in which case the production numbers from that RS could be used instead.

If nobody speaks out against this edit, I'll make it in a week or so.

- still-anon copyeditor 216.254.21.202 (talk) 19:14, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I just made this change much as I proposed, by deleting the vanillaexchange.com reference completely, and editing the sentence it was attached to to remove the "half" claim that presumably originated there. (Btw, the domain vanillaexchange.com *is* still registered, but there seems to be no DNS entry for it anywhere.)

Does anyone else care that the article still uses the "ancient" production stats from the HerbalGram article? This bugs me a bit, and I think the corresponding claim should be updated with better numbers, or at least clarified as being old and likely outdated. 216.254.21.202 (talk) 20:45, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi folks. I suspect current data on production is quite a bit off from the listed numbers due to the price spike in the mid-2000s. Moreover, India's EXIM Bank reported over 100 metric tons of production in country in 2005, and that number was rapidly rising (for the same reason). Can someone dig up more recent numbers? Thx.Shayanakadidal (talk) 04:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Which Mycorrhizal Fungi Species Is Required For Vanilla To Germinate?

Which mycorrhizal fungi is required for vanilla to germinate?24.83.148.131 (talk) 00:52, 19 January 2009 (UTC)BeeCier

Vanilla Planifolia

There is No mention of Vanilla planifoliabeing grown extensively in South India. The vanilla grown in India is of Bourbon type . Over 200 MT/ year of Cured Vanilla Beans are being exported from India, over the past eight years. (USDA Statistics) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jyothiramamohan (talk • contribs) 04:26, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

ITC external link to trade data

Hello everyone, I am working for the International Trade Centre (ITC). In the absence of any link towards the trade figures for this product category, I would like to propose the addition of an external link that could lead directly to the specific product trade data held by ITC. I would like you to consider this link under the WP:ELYES #3 prescriptions. Moreover, the reliability and the pertinence of this link can be supported by the following facts 1) ITC is part of the United Nations 2) No registration is required 3) Trade data (imports/exports) are regularly updated 4) The link gives direct access to the trade database referring to the specific product 5) The addition of a link to reliable trade data could provide an appropriate contribution to the article Thank you in advance for your attention.Divoc (talk) 18:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Spice?

What is it that makes vanilla a spice? You wouldn't put vanilla extract on a spice rack! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.26.13.2 (talk) 22:52, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure why you would say that because I think that most people do. Also, I would call it a spice because of its function. It is basically a flavoring agent like salt or pepper. I've never seen a recipe where vanilla was used as a main ingredient like apple in an apple pie or even as a sauce like tomato in a tomato sauce dish. There always seems to be a "carrying" agent such as custard (egg) or the cream in a vanilla ice cream.23.16.154.149 (talk) 06:27, 7 March 2013 (UTC)BeeCier

The standing definition used by WP:Herbs is that a spice is the stem, seed, or bark of a plant used to flavor food. A herb is the leaf or flower of a plant used to flavor food. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:07, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Fermentation

E.g. this article says that the spice comes from fermented beans. In the article there is no mention of such process… How is it then? --Nefronus (talk) 19:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

In my language "fermentation" means curing by yeast. Maybe the fermentation mentioned in English articles about vanilla is meant to describe the enzymatic processes within "killing, sweating, drying, conditioning" without any yeast or bacteria used whatsoever? --Nefronus (talk) 19:58, 31 March 2015 (UTC)