Talk:Watercress

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Incorrect Image[edit]

I believe the image displayed on this page is actually of land cress Barbarea verna(http://www.alabamaplants.com/Yellowalt/Barbarea_verna_page.html) not Nasturtium officinale. Thanks also to anyone who edited my references on this page as I am a new contributor. Lifeiloveyou (talk) 16:20, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


Thanks[edit]

Seglea, thanks so much for the added table and corrections to the watercress entry. - Plautus

Integration[edit]

Shouldnt this article be integrated with Rorippa? Isnt watercress simply the english name for this genus? Or is watercress only applied to Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum and Rorippa microphylla? TeunSpaans 07:18, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Watercress is the English common name for several species of aquatic plants grown for food. Rorippa microphylla was Nasturtium microphyllum but has (1998) more recently been placed back in Nasturtium. I believe this also is true for R. nasturtium-aquaticum, now in Genus Nasturtium - Marshman 17:18, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC) Until taxonomy settles down, maybe should be kept separate from Nasturtium (scientific name) - Marshman
Rorippa seems to be the correct genus, at least for the USDA database. and I agree that two articles are confusing and they should be merged.
ITC as of 12 SEP 2007 - "Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum (L.) Hayek -- accepted -- watercress" Raggz 16:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
It would be great to have a Watercress Article - the cooking, nutrition and such remaining. There should only be one botanical article - Rorippa. ALL scientific names should be referenced in Watercress, and for now, without asserting a preference. There should be one article for the taxonomic issues.

Food Value Title[edit]

If there are no objections I'd like to change the "Food Value" title to something more formal such as "Nutritional Value". Also, I found this link

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17284750&query_hl=6&itool=pubmed_docsum

that I'd like to mention under the aforementioned heading. If someone else wants to do it though, I have no problems with it.24.83.178.11 08:31, 11 February 2007 (UTC)KnowledgeSeeker

Photograph[edit]

The photograph on this page is loading very slowly. Presumably it's not been adjusted for web use. Is there a better photograph of a more suitable size which can be used? The one included could be linked to instead. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cosmopolitancats

I'm all for signed comments but if this $%^^&* bot would have the good grace to at least allow people 10 seconds to realise they haven't signed a post then maybe the number of these signature bot entries could be reduced! Cosmopolitancats 09:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging[edit]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 11:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Health benefits and cancer defense[edit]

I propose changing the sentence regarding watercress' cytochrome P450 inhibition (in the context of health benefits) to something more neutral. One could argue that blocking this enzyme -- and the body's ability to metabolize drugs -- is not a health benefit. Re-wording this statement to point out that watercress has interaction with CYP enzymes and drug metabolism could help prevent the misinterpretation that achieving these effects is a health goal. 50.134.143.38 (talk) 03:19, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Help Cleanup[edit]

From "Watercress" page, Wiki asked for help: "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: It is found in other continents apart from Europe and Asia.. Please help improve this article if you can. The talk page may contain suggestions. (July 2011)"

OK the easy answer is: Though Native to Asia and Europe, Watercress is a valued human food crop, also growing in North America and (and anywhere else colonized by Europeans or Asians = most of the globe/ where it can grow... like all food crops, it's doubtless escaped cultivation and naturalized. It's growing in mass profusion in the drainage of the artesian Sacred Springs at Kuruvungna, a Tongva (native tribe later called Gabrielino) Village dating back to ~400BC, now University High School Campus on Los Angeles' west side... somebody could have planted it there in modern times- there was a horticulture program at Uni Hi- except...

the complication is: Watercress (there now), & Chia (Savia columbariae, a prized native seed available form health food stores, apparently extirpated from the site now) were reportedly given Spain's Portola expedition when they camped in Kuruvungna back in 1769! How did the watercress get established ahead of them if this was the 1st of 2 Spanish land expeditions in the area?- prob. the 1st documented European land visitors through this area (with embedded Catholic priests that returned to set up the California mission system)...

Could the Portola's "watercress" be something else? Like native Mustards (Thelypodium spp.) or Bittercresses (Cardamine spp.) shown on the same page in A Field Guide to Pacific States Wildflowers (pub. 1976 long before the taxo-names went where they are today); a book worth keeping because of really good b&w plant drawings. It lists "White Watercress... Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum" as "Alien" (= non-native). Or is there a native CA watercress not in this book? I think I'll have to go back to Kuruvungna Springs with the book to recheck the species drawings... --BIG PLANT-IN (talk) 01:24, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

N. microphyllum[edit]

I'm trying to confirm that Nasturtium microphyllum is commonly cultivated, and am having a heck of a time finding anything reliable. I suspect that it may be occasionally gathered in the wild and consumed, but am skeptical that it is worth keeping more than a passing mention of this species in this article. The best info I've found is here [1], but on consulting the references provided, most are just talking about N. officinale. One source does mention that a hybrid between the two was cultivated prior to WWII. As the article currently discusses two species, the taxobox isn't really appropriate. I'd like to remove most mentions of N. microphylla and change the taxbox to focus on N. officinale. If a source can be found for cultivation of N. microphylla, I'd remove the taxoboxPlantdrew (talk) 22:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

As another editor added N. officinale to the taxobox, I'm going to go ahead and remove N. microphyllum from the article.Plantdrew (talk) 20:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

"Watercress capital of the world"[edit]

There are a couple obvious problems with lending weight to this term.

  1. More than one town has claimed to be the world's watercress capital: Oviedo, Florida [2] [3]; Huntsville and New Market, Alabama [4] [5]; and Alresford, UK [6], are apparently among the claimants. This suggests that the title is at best a locally recognized nickname, even though "capital of the world" is designed to suggest a worldwide recognition.
  2. It's a hyperbolic, ill-defined marketing term whose purpose is to promote. Wikipedia's role is to convey facts, not parrot slogans. Better to let the facts about watercress' impact on local economies etc. speak for themselves.

If the slogan is deemed worth mentioning, it should at least be made clear in the article that the title is claimed by more than one town. AtticusX (talk) 23:08, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Mereville distributes 10% of Frances total watercress production, I wouldn't call that the Watercress Capital of the World. Huntsville is the spritual home of watercress and New Alresford has been passed the baton, I see no need for the constant changes, they have a watercress line and an annual festival, please contact the editor before future changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.202.204.243 (talkcontribs) 15:23, 23 January 2013‎
The article should reflect what available sources say. The source for Mereville seems to be a description of a video file, so wouldn't meet WP:RS, but I'd note that the given Guardian source for Alresford merely says that "Arlesford in Hampshire is recognised as the nation's capital of watercress". --McGeddon (talk) 15:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi AtticusX. I agree with you, the idea of companies/places self marketing or self promoting on Wikipedia is not what the site is about and I've never been fond of this. Nonetheless with regard to watercress' impact on local economies etc The Watercress line receives 150,000 visitors a year and has an annual turnover in excess of £2m. (http://www.hlf.org.uk/news/Pages/WatercressLines.aspx) With this and the 27 full time workers and nearly 500 volunteers that work on the line not to mention the annual festival that brings in 15,000 people I would day that the benefits to the local economy are clear as day. I appreciate that there are other towns/cities that lay claim to the crown but they have no grounds, until similar festivals occur in these other places it has to be said that New Alresford is the World Capital of Watercress. Thanks

Note: McGeddon I see what you're saying, if it's not going to known as the Watercress Capital of the World then Watercress Capital of the Nation will suffice.

Tumtuki should not count as a reference — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.202.204.243 (talk) 17:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

The 1986 Oviedo source does explicitly say "the town of Oviedo, northeast of Orlando, is called the watercress capital of the world". It does not mention any turnover figures or festival details for comparison, but it is not Wikipedia's place to draw comparisons and decide which is the true "world capital" of a plant; we should just echo whatever sources exist. --McGeddon (talk) 17:15, 1 February 2013 (UTC)