Talk:Canopy (grape)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Wine (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Wine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of wines, grapes, winemaking and wine-producing regions 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-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Plants (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis 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-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article Title[edit]

I suggest moving Canopy (vine) to Canopy (viticulture), as a clearer title and consistent with Canopy (biology) article title. Usage of the term vine in viticulture refers to Vitis but in biology also refers to other taxa. Establishment of viticulture in title makes clear and consistent (my opinion as a PhD biologist and professional consultant in viticulture). Not a big problem; requires only brief discussion. Pmrich (talk) 16:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Weak keep. I objected to the previous move to canopy (grapevine), because the "grape" part felt superfluous and USE to me. I'm fairly neutral between canopy (vine) and canopy (viticulture), so I don't see a compelling reason to move, but I wouldn't really object to it either. Although I perhaps shouldn't argue with the broadest definition of canopy being applied here, possibly this article is a tad too wide in scope right now. I understand canopy (at least as in "canopy management") in viticulture to be primarily concerned with the leaves - getting an adequate amount of them and keeping them in the right place in relation to the grapes. Vine training systems existed long before the term "canopy management" became popular, and also exists to simplify the grape picking, keep the vineyard tidy, support young vines, and so on. Admittedly, though, I drink the stuff rather than grow it... :-) Tomas e (talk) 17:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep This follows the usage found in the Oxford Companion to Wine and there doesn't seem to be a need for further disambiguation since there is apparently not another article talking about vine plant canopy apart from the viticulture usage. To answer Tomas, the viticulture concept of Canopy is concerned with much more than just the leaves, which was one of my motivations in starting this article in order to bring proper context to the term. AgneCheese/Wine 03:07, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Move. In the context of an encyclopedic entry, Canopy (viticulture) is a better title than Canopy (vine) because it clearly and immediately identifies the domain of the article, consistent with the Canopy (biology) article title, and does not require the intended audience to have a detailed knowledge of how the term "vine" is used in different disciplines (Biology vs. Viticulture) and in different common usage. I encourage you to reconsider, given that there is no compelling reason to keep the term "vine" in the title, and good reason for clarity and utility in encyclopedic entries. The viticulture canopy article is progressing nicely, and could be improved with some reorganization, discussion of canopy function (light capture, transpiration, microclimate, access for harvest), and inclusion of important research and practical management topics (light interception and vine health, energy balance as it affects microclimate and fruit ripening, sunburn prevention, frost damage prevention, evenness of ripening, trellis design and row orientation, etc.). Thanks for your input.
  • In regards to your point "there is no compelling reason to keep the term "vine" in the title" I would say that WP:COMMONNAME is a very compelling reason and again the lack of a competing article that would require further disambiguation. If there was an article talking about the canopy of vines apart from a viticultural context then I would be more swayed to add (viticulture) to the title in order to disambig.....but again there is no need. There is no confusion in the title as the first line makes very clear what the article is about. That is a vital point since Wikipedia's naming convention is based on need for disambig rather than need for context in the title. (Sadly in some cases, I concede, but that is nonetheless community consensus at the moment) Look at the naming convention for television episode. Can anyone say that the average reader would know at first glance what in the world the articles The Captain's Hand, Fifteen Minutes of Shame, Homer's Odyssey or The 23rd Psalm are about by the title alone? AgneCheese/Wine 17:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
  • BTW, I encourage you to add reliable sources to your edits in order to maintain the encyclopedic integrity of the article. Your last edit added some content that made it seem as if the current reference (Oxford) was supporting it. That is technically not in that reference on the pages listed in the footnote. I did not remove it because the information is correct, however it is still better for you to add proper referencing rather than falsely having them be attribute to another source. AgneCheese/Wine 17:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
...references added... Pmrich (talk) 09:15, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
  • My concern is mostly about unambiguously identifying that the article is about grapes (Vitis) and not all climbers or lianas. It seems there is some strong preference for the term "vine" (clear to wine/viticulture readers, but not necessarily others). How do you feel about the title Canopy_(grape), aside from the position that no change is needed? Most reliable publications about the subject refer to "grape canopy". Pmrich (talk) 09:15, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
Again, the consensus of the Wikipedia community is that title's primary consideration is disambiguation with any additional context being provided by the lead paragraph. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to the move Canopy (grape) provided that the Canopy (vine) redirect stays in place for all the articles currently linking to it. AgneCheese/Wine 14:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
I certainly appreciate the points you make. Thank you for helping me to learn more about Wikipedia. Your contribution to WP:Wine is substantial and admirable. I am grateful for your input on this relatively minor matter. Unless there is objection I'll make the move to Canopy (grape) with redirection from Canopy (vine). Pmrich (talk) 14:38, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Grape Canopy Article Content[edit]

I suggest the following draft outline for expansion of the grape canopy article. Pmrich (talk) 13:48, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


   What is grape canopy? importance, references

1. Canopy Components / Organization

    stems (trunk, cordon, shoots)
    reproductive structures (flowers, fruits)

2. Canopy Function

    light capture and photoynthesis
    water use and transpiration

3. Canopy Management

        trellis design 
        planting (row orientation, spacing)
        training, pruning
        vine growth and health
        regulating sugar content and secondary compounds
        uneven ripening