|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peanut article.|
|Peanut has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Science. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|WikiProject Plants||(Rated B-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject Food and drink||(Rated B-class, Top-importance)|
|Wikipedia CD Selection|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 100 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
We want a peanut gallery!
The cracker people let their food have one.
More reasonably, the pictures look crammed together right now in article space. They should have a proper home at the bottom, at least two of each three.
- Sounds like a reasonable plan. But you're not trying to pull another shell game on us, are you?--Mr Fink (talk) 04:21, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- Not everyone who aspires to combine peanuts is a Roanoke Hustler. But I'm intrigued by the "another" part. Have we met? InedibleHulk (talk) 04:40, September 24, 2014 (UTC)
- I don't think so, I just couldn't resist joining a pun-fest. So, how should we set up the gallery? Remove one of each of the pictures from the sections and use them to form the gallery?--Mr Fink (talk) 04:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
- That sounds simplest. Unless there's a picture in here that's crucial to a section. If so, I don't see it. Maybe wait for a third opinion. And yeah, puns are fabaceaelous!
Whoever thought to call the pictures section the peanut gallery you are a credit to your species. You have my sincere thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:5:C700:584:F819:B7:6A16:EEEE (talk) 04:26, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Re: George Washington Carver:
"George Washington Carver is well known for his participation in that program in which he developed hundreds of recipes for peanuts."
- Do you have reputable sources that state and explain this?--Mr Fink (talk) 03:39, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Nyctinastic movement of leaves
Miscellaneous lead material
Per WP:BRD, I edited, and have now reverted again, content provided by user Davidbertioli whose user page shows he is a plant geneticist specializing in peanuts. Although this expertise is no doubt valuable for the peanut article, I sense from the edit history he may be too dedicated just to this article and may be subject to WP:BIASED and risks of WP:OUTING. Please invest some time in other articles.
The sections below are open for review.
Lead information too detailed
China accounts for 37% of World production, Africa for 25%, India for 21%, and the Americas 8%. In Africa, remarkably, its production exceeds that of all other grain legumes put together, and it is an extremely important source of protein, energy, and iron (production statistics from 2013).
*Comment: the above nutrient information is not confirmed by FAOSTAT data, but rather is in the USDA tables which I provided. See the nutrient table which displays several minerals and vitamins with more significant Daily Values than iron. I also provided a more accurate FAOSTAT URL for 2013 production data (the most recent available).
As a legume, peanut belongs to the botanical family Fabaceae (also known as Leguminosae, and commonly known as the bean or pea family). Like most other legumes, peanuts harbor symbiotic nitrogen-fixing bacteria in root nodules. This capacity to fix nitrogen means peanuts require less nitrogen-containing fertilizer and improve soil fertility, making them valuable in crop rotations. It also accounts for the high protein content of peanut seeds. It is an annual herbaceous plant growing 30 to 50 cm (1.0 to 1.6 ft) tall. The leaves are opposite and pinnate with four leaflets (two opposite pairs; no terminal leaflet); each leaflet is 1 to 7 cm (⅜ to 2¾ in) long and 1 to 3 cm (⅜ to 1 inch) across. Like many other legumes, the leaves are nyctinastic, that is they have "sleep" movements, closing at night.
The specific name, hypogaea means "under the earth", because peanut pods develop underground, a feature known as geocarpy. The flowers are 1.0 to 1.5 cm (0.4 to 0.6 in) across, and yellowish orange with reddish veining. In structure, they appear superficially similar to the flowers of peas and beans. However, intriguing differences are seen. The ovary is not, as expected, enclosed by the petals, but is at the base of what appears to be the flower stem. In fact, this "stem" is hollow and is part of the flower itself. It is a highly elongated floral cup (termed a hypanthium), through which runs the style and at the base of which is the ovary. After fertilization, a stalk at the base of the ovary (termed a pedicel) elongates to form a thread-like structure known as a "peg". This pushes the ovary down into the soil where it develops into a mature peanut pod. Pods are 3 to 7 cm (1.2 to 2.8 in) long, normally containing 1 to 4 seeds.
*Comment: the above is botanical information not suitable for the lead per WP:LEAD. I created a Botany section and placed the information there. Also Davidbertioli, keep in mind we are writing an encyclopedia for a general reader, not for experts per WP:WWIN and WP:NOTJOURNAL.
Peanuts are similar in taste and nutrional profile to tree nuts such as walnuts, pecans, hazelnuts, and almonds, and they are often served in a similar ways in many Western cuisines. In long-term studies, the regular consumption of peanuts and tree nuts has been associated with health benefits including the reduction in heart and respiratory diseases and cancer.
*Comment: I copyedited this rambling section and replaced the USDA reference with a more precise URL from the USDA database. It is not appropriate to imply health benefits of peanuts or other nuts per WP:MEDRS. A rigorous review was provided by the FDA in 2003 and stands as the current status that positive evidence for any effect is insufficient.
I will work to incorporate the content from Davidbertioli but it is not appropriate to fully revert any changes to content you add because you are a peanut expert.
References for this Talk discussion
- Team, Faostat. "FAOSTAT". faostat.fao.org. Retrieved 2015-09-28.
- Cite error: The named reference
plantwas invoked but never defined (see the help page).
- "Legumes Of The World | Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew". www.kew.org. Retrieved 2015-09-29.
- D.H. Putnam, E.S. Oplinger, T.M. Teynor, E.A. Oelke, K.A. Kelling, J.D. Doll (1991). "Peanut". Alternative Field Crops Manual, NewCROP Center, Purdue University. Retrieved 26 September 2015.
- Smith, Ben W. (December 1950). "Arachis hypogaea. Aerial Flower and Subterranean Fruit". Am. J. Bot., 37 (10): 802-815.
- "Nutrient Data : SR27 - Download Files". www.ars.usda.gov. Retrieved 2015-09-30.
- Bao, Ying; Han, Jiali; Hu, Frank B.; Giovannucci, Edward L.; Stampfer, Meir J.; Willett, Walter C.; Fuchs, Charles S. (2013-11-21). "Association of Nut Consumption with Total and Cause-Specific Mortality". New England Journal of Medicine 369 (21): 2001–2011. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1307352. ISSN 0028-4793. PMC 3931001. PMID 24256379.
comments on recent edits and comments by Zefr
Although I think my actions fitted well into the "BOLD, revert, discuss" cycle, I apologize to Zefr if he took offense at my initial reversion of his edits. The size of the edits, the very short, incomplete edit description, and the extreme brevity of Zefr Wikipedia user profile led me to the initial conclusion that the edit was probably overzealous and/or ill considered (from a quick look at edit history I think it was largest legitimate reduction in article size since 15th Jan 2015: an edit also made by Zefr). I wanted to avoid good edits being accumulated on top of ill considered edits. It would have been more difficult to revert damage whilst being considerate to other contributors. As is, it's clear that, although there were some problems introduced and deletions made, Zefr made a serious edit, overall I liked the restructuring made. I appreciate the comments made by Zefr above, although I don't understand why he is concerned about "WP:OUTING". I would appreciate more explanation to be able to understand better. Also I'm a bit mystified as to the request that I "invest some time in other articles". It's easy to see that this article can be improved quite easily, and (whilst I have never claimed any special privileges for being an "expert") I have a good knowledge base to do so. Whilst I will keep in mind that the "encyclopedia is for a general reader", and try to respect previous contributions, surely it makes sense for me to keep going and make the article better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidbertioli (talk • contribs) 16:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
- David -- WP:OUTING can potentially affect an editor's unbiased participation in improving the encyclopedia, per WP:5P2 which involves a main neutral principal of Wikipedia's WP:5P, WP:NPOV. You have chosen to publicly use your own name, identify your profession as a plant scientist specializing in peanuts, and individually focus on the peanut article. Outing enables critique (against you) by other editors who may resent that your own publications are used in supporting article information (on 13 October 2015, reference numbers 6,8,9 and 12 are your publications), and so may involve WP:PLUG (self-promotion) for your research, interpreted by some as more important or more credible than by competitive scientists. Outing also enables untoward activity from the public who may be negative toward peanuts, and by inference, negative toward your research or you personally. Just a few thoughts for now, but meanwhile, in my opinion, the peanut article has benefited from your participation. --Zefr (talk) 17:30, 13 October 2015 (UTC)