Talk:Orange (fruit)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

WikiProject Echo has identified Orange (fruit) as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Amharic language Wikipedia.

Contents 1 Short on expertise 2 Hybrid Fruit 3 Joke 4 the rind 5 Name the Parts 6 Segmentless oranges 7 too many images! 8 Cultivation and uses 9 2005 World Production Data Available 10 'Orange' redirect 11 Disputed 12 Production of oranges by state 13 Unflattering Picture of a Sectioned Orange 14 Orange picture 15 Preference for picture 15.1 Unpeeled 15.2 Peeled 16 Entymology 17 dyed in the rind? 18 Breakout navel oranges onto their own page?

[edit] Short on expertise

The article was a little short on professional expertise, IMHO. Like it was written by researchers instead of someone who has spent their life working with oranges. Being a "navel orange freak" for over 50 years I've waited each year for navel season. Some years they are so sweet that I actually suspect sugar has been added. So I was a little disappointed with the lack of discussion of factors that affect quality and taste. Something a long-time grower might provide an opinion on.

[edit] Hybrid Fruit

On the Orange page it states that it's possible that the orange was a hybrid of the tangerine and the pomelo. But, when you read the pomelo entry, it states that the tangelo is a hybrid between the tangerine and pomelo. Can two fruits (i.e orange and tangelo) be differing hybrids from the same two sources? Stewart McAbney 10:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes it is possible for two hybrids of the same parentage to produce different looking plants, mainly due to what genetics it inherits. But the orange has been cultivated in china for a long time and therefore is not likely to look exactly like the first hybrid that was its ancestor. --Bjwebb (talk) 09:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Joke

I was wondering what is the black stuff that is sometimes present on the bottom of navel oranges, I tried searching for this on google and wikipedia but didn't find anything. If anyone knows what it is, I think it would be very useful to include it in the article. Thanks!

Just in case you are wondering what it looks like, it is something black that seems to go inside the orange about a centimeter or so. You can clearly see it from the outside if you look at the navel part of the orange, but usually it's not present. I would say 5-10% of the navel oranges I have seen have this.

---

Nah.. it came from someone saying: Knock knock. Who's there? Banana. Banana who? Knock knock. Who's there? Banana. Banana who? Knock knock. Stop knocking who is this anyway? Orange. Orange who? Orange you glad i stopped saying banana?

Not quite; it happened in French. The 'n' is still present in Spanish. The same thing happened to several other words, such as umpire and newt (the other way). In French, the 'n' was assimilated to the indefinite article "une". -phma

This is a common thing in English. I guess I should add it to the A, an article. An even weirder one in French was the transition from l'ejade to le jade. Ortolan88

---

OK, is the fruit named for the colour (as it says in the entry or the colour) or the colour named for the fruit (as stated in this article about the fruit)? And is there a good citation to link to about this? - Logotu 23:39, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

No one ever answered the question, but the colour entry was changed to agree with this one that the fruit came first, so all seems to be good. - Logotu 01:39, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The color is named for the fruit. In Old English, the color was originally called "geoluhread" (Modern English: "yellowred"). When the fruit made its way to the English-speaking world, "orange" was probably used for a particular shade of yellowred, just as "lime" and "melon" are used for shades of green, "rose" a shade of red, or "violet" a shade of purple. The word "orange" obviously supplanted "yellowred" as a whole, but I haven't the slightest idea when this was. --Corvun 01:54, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

---

[edit] the rind

is the entire rind edible, like an apple's? (i'd especially like to know since i just ate a whole orange, in the manner of eating an apple)

Yes, the rind is perfectly edible. As a matter of fact, you can put yeast on the rind, keep it somewhat damp (do not submerge it in water), and in a few weeks you'll have a hallucinogenic substance on your hands. Just scrape off the mold, grap something tasty to drink for a chaser (it will taste horrible), and you're ready for a citrus-trip. --Corvun 04:34, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Name the Parts

What are the proper names for the different parts of the peel? What is the proper name for the white stuff left on the orange after you peel it? The photos in the article are nice, but we need a good illustration too, with all the detailed component parts called out.

[edit] Segmentless oranges

My Argentinian friend claims that the oranges he eats in Argentina have no segments. I don't believe him. There's no such thing as an orange without segments, is there?

[edit] too many images!

I've been bold and gone ahead in restructuring the article somewhat (hopefully better!). But the big problem is that there's too many images, which severely distorts the rendering of the page, especially om monitors 1024 and less pixels wide. No offense meant to any of the photographers, but I've gone ahead and removed a few and shifted it all to the right. Maybe we could find a better solution to showcase all the photographs we have...? Dewet 19:15, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cultivation and uses

The text mentions : "Orange cultivation is a major business and an important part of the economies of ... Romania". Now, I showed this to my friend, a Romanian, and he was very surprised to learn this. He maintains that Romania has a climate similar to North America and that it's strange that oranges would manage to grow in his home country. Does anyone know if we have a reference citing Romania as an orange grower? Does anyone have any proof for either sides? I'll leave it for now, until I find my answer. ----Xtanstic 02:05, 19 October 2005

[edit] 2005 World Production Data Available

http://faostat.fao.org/faostat/servlet/XteServlet3?Areas=%3E862&Items=490&Elements=51&Years=2005&Format=Table&Xaxis=Years&Yaxis=Countries&Aggregate=&Calculate=&Domain=SUA&ItemTypes=Production.Crops.Primary&language=EN

Should replace 2004 in wiki. 4 new countries producing oranges this year.

[edit] 'Orange' redirect

""Orange" redirects here. For other uses, see Orange (disambiguation)." This is no longer true, 'Orange' goes to the disambiguation page.

[edit] Disputed

Why is there a disputed tag on this page indicating that the accuracy of this entire article is being disputed? It refers readers to this talk page for more information, yet (until this comment), there does not appear to be any dispute. If nobody cares to discuss the dispute, the tag should be removed within a few days. I seriously doubt the entire article is in dispute (it reads well to me as-is), so probably only a portion of it should be tagged, and with a more specific tag. Most importantly, the dispute should be discussed here. --Willscrlt 09:55, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Production of oranges by state

I was wondering what the statistics of orange production within the United States- state by state. I'm sure most of us are aware that Florida has top honors, but other states such as California, Arizona, and Texas also produce oranges. Has anyone seen these figures? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Buddmar (talk • contribs) 16:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Unflattering Picture of a Sectioned Orange

I think this picture is unflattering if not disgusting. Who would want to eat an orange after seeing that picture? I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it were inserted by somebody in the apple industry (known to be unscrupulous) or somebody with an extreme dislike of oranges. A picture that unflattering does not occur by mistake and I'm quite certain there is an agenda behind it. I know that this page is meant to be informative and not pro-orange, but that picture is treading into the dangerous territory of being anti-orange. I'm not saying that we should use the most flattering picture of a sectioned orange available on the 'net, but surely a compromise can be reached. I nominate that it be removed or changed in favor of a more neutral picture. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.164.60.98 (talk • contribs).

Yes this is clearly a far-malus conspiracy to drive down orange sales among the compulsive wikipedia browsing population. Please take whatever action you feel is necessary to restore the vital balance of presentation so that the prolitariate may once again rejuice. - JustinWick 19:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the picture is acceptable, and I think it is difficult for a picture to be neutral. Note that the same IP address also believes that oranges do not grow on trees WLU 19:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I do not think you truely grasp the extent to which apple fans will go to sabotage their competition. I hereby declare that all images of oranges on Wikipedia should be examined for NPOVness. 216.164.60.98, why don't you get on this ASAP? - JustinWick 21:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

WLU - That is disingenuous and a complete misrepresentation of anything I've ever posted. Of course oranges grow on trees. I have a lot of knowledge of and experience with oranges. I simply made the point that there are those who remain unconvinced - and those people do exist. If you don't think that's worth noting, then fine, I can live with that. But that's not really what we're talking about right now. Anyhow, if I can find a more flattering picture do you really mind if I change it? JustinWick sees exactly what I am talking about (lol @ rejuice!). I am not about to accuse you of being the person who posted the offending picture or of being involved in the apple industry, but my antenna is up. Cheers!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 04:09, January 24, 2007 216.164.60.98 (talk • contribs).

WLU, are you some kind of apple sympathizer? Why do you defend a picture that is clearly not in the best interests of our daily nutritional needs. The anon might not go so far as to accuse you of conspiracy, but it's clear to me that you are at the very least an apple sympathizer. Anon, can you take a better picture yourself? You seem to have a deep knowledge of oranges, and you at least live harmoniously with them in your life. WLU, go back to your cider press or whatever and let us fix this egregious crime against one of nature's most beautious botanical bounties. - JustinWick 22:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

All the power to you if you can find a better picture of an orange. The rest of your contributions are POV, unsourced and use weasel words. WLU

From personal experience, I find it extremely difficult and time consuming to remove all the remaining white bits without damaging the rest of the fruit. It's fairly sensitive. - Zero1328 _Talk? 02:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

These are oranges we're talking about. As the anon mentioned, there are those that stand to profit (quite handsomely) by altering the public perception of the incredibly delicious and nutritious fruit. Just because something is difficult does not mean it is not worth it in the end. Any true Wikipedian knows that their first duty is to the truth - and in this case that is not unflattering pictures of oranges posted by those opposed to their greatness. - JustinWick 22:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Whether or not the picture looks "unflattering" is not important. If you want to have a picture of a perfectly peeled orange, why don't you try creating a picture yourself? The new image that replaced the older one is redundant, we have enough images of a sliced orange, and an image of a peeled one is needed to show that an orange has sections. The most important thing is to be sure it conveys the information well, not how pretty the thing looks. - Zero1328 _Talk? 02:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with 01328, the old pic with the white bits is a better choice. It also provides an opening to talk about the white bits - I believe they've got a fair amount of nutritional value to them beyond the vitamin C already mentioned, I'll try to dig up some other references. I also find the 'apple conspiracy' accusations more than a little absurd. WLU 13:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I cast my vote against the ugly picture. It's hideous. Wikipedia can do better than this. Also the new picture that I went to the trouble of finding, is sufficient to depict the inside of a navel orange which no other pic on the page does. Take a look at the other language wikipedias articles for Orange for some ideas of how to present an attractive and informative article. I got this pic from the Spanish wikipedia. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 15:24, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orange picture

Personally, I hadn't realized that the picture was worth reverting over, so lets discuss it. I'm for keeping the peeled orange picture on the page, for a couple reasons.

1. There are already 4 pictures with sliced oranges, and none with peeled oranges. I mostly peel my oranges when I eat them, so a peeled orange makes sense on the page.
2. The underdeveloped sections are easier to see as a separate set of lobes from the actual segments.
3. I really don't find the pericarp to be distasteful in any way. I eat the pericarp.
4. Since aesthetics are such a subjective thing, statements like 'I think the peeled/the cut picture is nicer' doesn't really add much weight to either side.
5. I hardly think that a single picture is going to alter the public perception of a piece of fruit; anyone who has eaten an orange realizes that there is pericarp.
6. I see no evidence of a pro-apple conspiracy on the page.
7. An apple is also a highly nutritious piece of fruit. Both articles have nutritional information on them, people can make their own decisions based on the info there.

What are other's thoughts on the subject? WLU 19:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

We should not be putting our personal bias into the article. I don't really care whether you believe there's some sort of apple conspiracy or not, but we have to decide which picture is the most informative, not the most pretty. - Zero1328 _Talk? 00:33, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Sure, that makes sense. I think the pic of the peeled orange is more informative than the sliced one, and is more informative to those reading the page. No other shows the pericarp (which is mentioned in the article), no other shows a peeled orange, no other shows the 'twin fruit' at the bottom of the navel orange as unambiguously. I think the original picture (this diff) is better. WLU 02:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Preference for picture

Since we can't agree on the picture and now both are gone like Solomon's baby, we may as well see if there is consensus one way or the other with both pictures visible here on the talkpage to indiate preference, reasons, etc.

[edit] Unpeeled

• I like this one, it shows how the "twin" is inside of the peel - but I don't really feel that strongly either way, the other one certainly looks edible. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 22:04, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peeled

• I prefer this one for several reasons:

1. There are already 4 pictures with sliced oranges, and none with peeled oranges. Since many people peel their oranges, at least one peeled orange makes sense on the page.
2. The underdeveloped sections of the navel orange are easier to see as a separate set of lobes from the actual segments. The 'twin fruit' is most unambiguous here, as it is separated from the body of the fruit.
3. The picture also clearly shows the separate sections of the orange, which no other picture shows.
4. The picture shows the pericarp, which none of the other pictures show.
5. The pericarp is also mentioned in the article, another reason to include a picture that shows the pericarp.
6. Statements regarding 'appearing' edible and inedible are subjective, it should be the more informative picture, not the most edible appearing one.

• WLU 23:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the peeled one's better, since there are no other pictures of a peeled orange, and the twin is seen clearly here. I couldn't have said it any better than WLU. - Zero1328 _Talk? 08:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Since no-one has any objections to the pic, and no one is pushing for the other one, you think we can put it back on the page? WLU 20:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I went ahead and put it back up. - Zero1328 _Talk? 22:14, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Entymology

The discussion of the entymology is causing example-creep. There's now way too many examples of the word for orange in too many different languages. At minimum the section is too long and could be turned into a table. However, I'd be much happier if it could be trimmed down to just a couple examples at most. There is also a main article for Orange (word), and they might be better served over there. But WP:NOT indiscriminate. WLU 14:15, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] dyed in the rind?

Are oranges dyed to either change or enhance their color before going to the market? The article didn't say.Jlujan69 01:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Some program I saw on Food Network (most likely Alton Brown) mentioned that some/most oranges sold on the US shelves have their color altered. The two common ways are dyeing with a vegetable dye or treating the oranges with ethylene gas (to make oranges make their own coloring). There are numerous references to this on the internet (most refer to this as fact) Here's an example.

In some countries where the temperatures never cool off, oranges remain green, even when mature. It is the cool temperatures which promote the release of the orange pigments (carotenes)

Here's another.

Oranges are naturally variable in their color, especially early in the season. They may be dyed to a uniform orange color by using a vegetable dye. Oranges so treated are stamped ‘color added’. Oranges may be ripened in rooms with ethylene gas. This is a harmless procedure which augments the natural ethylene gas that is produced by most ripening fruit.

Fry-kun 23:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the article should include a mention, perhaps under "trivia" that oranges are naturally green. http://www.slate.com/id/2161806?nav=tap3

I'd put in the edit myself, but I'd probably garble up the page. 69.2.251.189 23:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Breakout navel oranges onto their own page?

I think the biology and history of navel oranges is interesting enough to merit a separate page. There's even more that could be added, but it seems like it would be too much if it's left as a subsection of this page. Objections? --Mike Schiraldi 22:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think there's enough for a full page, though a separate section within the article is probably meritted. WLU 12:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Done.--Mike Schiraldi 01:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Could the description as to where on the navel orange the secondary mutation is located be any more convoluted? Would anyone object to simplifying it to being at the 'bottom' of the fruit?

I tried to make it a bit clearer, I'd prefer 'opposite the stem' to stay in, I think it's clearer. That being said, I'm not 100% certain my version is any better. WLU 22:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that was a big improvement. Thanks for chipping in. --Mike Schiraldi 00:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)