Talk:Clementine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Clementine is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a quality rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.
Food Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Sources

It seems part of this article was taken from here: http://www.producepete.com/shows/clementines.html That page also seems to contain more information.

aripollak 22:34, 22 Dec 2005 (EST)

[edit] No seeds?

I just bought some clementines, about 20 of them, and about 2 had a seed in them. The seed was about 1cm in length.

I agree - clementines do have seeds. Otherwise I wonder how they reproduce.

So they do? I thought the very definition of a fruit is they have seeds. I am going to update the article to say "very few"
Plants can be grown asexually from cuttings, graftings, cell cultures, etc. With most modern fruit bearing plants they have been hybridized with other closely related species with a different chromosome number to give the resultant plant an odd pairing of chromosomes, rendering it sterile. There can be some things that can happen to reverse the sterility, but thats outside the scope of this question. As noted in the article sometimes additional crossbreeding can reintroduce traits that were bred out. The typical clementine is seedless, though seeded versions can exist. also the structure is analogous to a fruit, and it just happens to be sterile and without seeds. Would you call a chicken egg something else because there is no embryo inside of it? -ZTS
Not only can plants be grown asexually, essentially all fruit trees are essentially always grown asexually by grafting. Different "varieties" of fruit, are really just different members of the same species, which have been cloned. - David Roundy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.21.152.53 (talk) 14:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

I think it qualifies as seedless, in the general usage of the term, much as seedless watermelons do have seeds, but they are small and edible. Since the average clementine doesn't have seeds, I think that the statement that they have very few seeds is a bit misleading.

agreed, the fruit is typically seedless. -ZTS

[edit] No proof

From my research, there is no proof that the French monk developed the clementine. He may have simply found it and spread it to Europe. There are claims that it originated in China. Perhaps the wording of this article should be changed.

Mothperson 20:31, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, a Clementine is the same thing as a Mikan. And Mikans came from japan. Fresheneesz 20:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
This page [1] says that a mikan is a mandarin (Citrus reticulata). The clementine is listed on that page as a cultivar. Given that "clementines are becoming the most important commercial mandarin variety" (see Mandarin orange#Varieties and characteristics, which also says that some mandarin varieties are crosses with other citrus), I suspect that the use of mikan for clementine is essentially a substitution of the general for the more specific. Therefore, it is not this page (clementine) that mikan should be merged with, but rather the mandarin orange page. See also [2], which is a lot less fuzzy than Wikipedia's mandarin, clementine, and mikan articles. -- Justinbb 03:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Popularity

Anyone have a sourse on the popularity of Clementines? I knew that they only renctly became widely available in the U. S., but as near as I can tell they're very popular, in which case mention of that should probably be made. But I don't have any sourse besides my own observations. Snowboardpunk

I live in Kentucky, and I can tell you, people are nuts for these things, due to their sweet taste and easy peeling. Something in the article should be written about this fact and properly cited. Veracious Rey t • c • r 03:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, However there is nothing examplifying the James Saunt story. Does anyone has a referrence?

My bad, did not made till the end of the page on the first read... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.67.65.34 (talk) 22:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Nectar

To me, it seems the word nectar and juice is mixed up here. I think the word juice is more appropriate as nectar is produced by flowers to attract insects. I presume this is not the case here. But English is not my mother tongue, so I don’t feel I’m the one who should correct this. no it doesnt mater they should use correct words t make the whole sentance sound inteligent ±clementyn 19:12,03 oct 2006 .

[edit] Ridiculous amount of links

I fixed the page so that it doesn't contains links to .. like.. seeds and stuff. Links are supposed to help someone understand the articles topic better. Please do NOT link to anything and everything that may or may not have an article. Fresheneesz 20:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Difference between Satsuma and Clementine

Does anyone know if there's a real difference between a clementine and a satsuma?

Mandarin orange specifies a satsuma as the species Citrus reticulata, the same as specified on this page for the clementine. The same article also notes that madarin oranges do not have seeds because they are parthenocopic.
I don't have a good source on this, but I think Satsuma's and Clementine's are different cultivars that were produced by the same type of hybridization (Mandarin X Orange). I have lived on the both the east coast and the west coast of the United States. Stores tend to sell Satsuma's on the west coast and Clementines on the east. I have eaten both. I have noticed subtle but distinct differences: Satsuma's have slightly thicker skin and are easier to peel than the already easy Clementines (I can usually take all the skin off in one peel in a few seconds), Satsuma's also seem to be a bit sweeter.--Metatree 20:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Here in the UK the Satsumas are displayed next to the Clementines (this article is a bit wrong). They are definitely similar, but quite different.
This also says that the Southern US uses the term Satsuma. I've grown up in the South, started eating Clementines around 1990 and have never in my life (until I read this article) heard of a Satsuma.
Yes, clementine and satsuma are two rather different types of mandarin. See references such as the Hodgson article I added to the external links of the Clementine article, or the other references I suggested elsewhere on this talk page. -- Justinbb 06:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Segments

Similar to another observation, while reading this article and eating a clementine I realized that mine had 13 segments, rather than the 8-12 mentioned in this article. Is this just some crazy mutation, or is this common? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ShortLifeLived (talk • contribs) 05:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Availability and Growth Origins

I have only recently become acquainted with Clementines. Are the available year round? I've been told that they are only available around the holiday season. I'm also curious about the differences that may be recognized between California grown versus Spain grown product. From my own personal experience, the Spain grown product had a much more pleasing taste than the California grown.

[edit] Pomerans vs. Bitter Orange

I could find no references to the term "pomerans" in English, although I found some references to that word in other languages. This page indicates that "pomerans" or similar term in Finnish, Swedish, Norwegian, Danish, Icelandic, and Russian, would translate into "biter orange" or "Seville orange" in English.

[edit] Abuse

Why are people chumming this article? That's twice I've reverted here, and other editors have had to as well. Grr. Lexein 10:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit info

I deleted the statement "Clementines are awesome" from the article. While I completely agree, such opinion doesn't belong in an encyclopedic article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.42.118 (talk) 23:10, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Medium" or "small"?

The article says they are "medium-sized" citrus but I would say they are "small." Clementines are often smaller than a lemon. A pomelo is "very large," a grapefruit is "large," a navel orange, tangerine, or tangelo is "medium," a clementine, lemon, or lime is "small," and a Key lime is "very small." Badagnani (talk) 07:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree with you on this, however there must be an official and widely used way to rank the size of citrus fruit. -- carol 16:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leading quotation

As per WP:LEAD and WP:MOS, the lead section, that is, "the section before the first heading", should "be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, summarizing the most important points, explaining why the subject is interesting or notable, and briefly describing its notable controversies, if there are any". As it stands, this article's lead isn't capable of doing so, as its lead section has been replaced by a quotation. I attempted to remedy the situation, by transforming the first headed section into a stand-alone lead, but was reverted by Carol Spears, with a recommendation to move the discussion to this forum. In my opinion, this is not something that needs to be discussed; this is the MOS, and just good common sense otherwise. We should attempt to describe our topic, and a context-free advertisement for the wonders of clementines preceding any definition or description of clementines is simply not the best way to do so. The quotation would be much more useful to the reader if it were further down in the article, and integrated into some form of relevant discussion elsewhwere. (This article, ironically, lacks any discussion of the nutritional content of the clementine aside from the topmost quotation. A new section, integrating the quotation, would better serve the reader, I'd imagine.) Also, see WP:MOSQUOTE re:call-outs—simply put, blockquotes are favored above them. Thank you for your time! Happy holidays! Geuiwogbil (Talk) 00:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

All good points. Here is my take on this issue. I had an article that I wrote nomintated and accepted as a Did You Know article that has all of the bad and wrong qualities that you outlined here. There seems to be no end to linkable documentation here about what is acceptable and good and what isn't. Wikipedia isn't the only example of this, however, and long before this I discovered two things about most people that I encountered. The best devise for teaching is example and the other thing is that occasionally, something new and interesting happens when a good mind is not cluttered with a lot of dogmatic policy. It should be interesting to read other views and see even more wikilinks to policy and such about this matter here. Thanks for looking at this and thinking about it by the way. And about the holidays, do you know if there is an article about how stupid it is to have the end of the year when it has been scheduled? -- carol 11:07, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
No, I am not familiar. It does seem quite cold though, doesn't it? I suppose it had to do with the end of harvesting season and the need to rush indoors to preserve the warmth. It has quite a deathly finality about it; the loss of leaves on surface flora, the freezing-over of still bodies of water, the hibernation periods of certain mammals, etc. I'm not really familiar with what sort of thought or tradition went into it, agricultural, ecological or otherwise. Apparently, it's a Roman thing that came along with more general calendar reforms in the Early Modern era. Before then, dates in early Spring were used.
The new year always seemed to me to occur in April where I lived, no matter what everyone else and the calendar said. I can see how it would be one of the first days after the task of dividing the harvest had been accomplished. In these newer centuries, it just seems like dangerous weather to be out drinking in and for people who live where it snows, not that fun to dress up to go out in. -- carol 01:13, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Very much so; holidays in any other season would be more appropriate. It just gets to be one of those things though: it's been here too long, we can't change it. We just have to stick with it. Unfortunately. Geuiwogbil (Talk) 03:01, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
As regards the quotation, I think that, whatever WikiPolicy recommends, a good definition and description of the clementine would be more helpful to the reader than a quotation. The quotation is quite appealing aesthetically, but it's just not as useful as a traditional leading paragraph could be. It sort of assumes that the reader knows something of clementines before they drop in—and I wasn't entirely sure of what distinguished them from mandarins, oranges, and other citrus fruits before I dropped in either. It's a surprise, so whether you think surprise is generally a good thing or a bad thing would have some influence here. I'd be interested to think what the wider community thinks as well. It was nice speaking to you, carol. I'll drop out now. Good luck with the article! Geuiwogbil (Talk) 21:55, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
If I removed the quotations, it would be a cited sentence in the text. It is all that a person actually needs to know about the fruit. Almost everything else on that page is trivia. The quotes there to me mean that I do not have to verify those statements that the quoted person made. Are you S.N.Smith, btw? Cquote He Doeth Protest To Much /Cquote -- W.Shakespeare
My calculus book (I think) had quotes from one of the Alice in Wonderlands as an introduction to every new chapter. I learned a lot from whatever book that was and not about Alice and her looking glass whose books I never read. If I claimed it added texture to the piece would that be too punny? -- carol 01:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Heh. No, I like the quotation, I just don't think it should start the article. Somewhere below the very first sentence. I should like to know what a clementine is before I go out and begin purchasing them. Some articles have some adequate quote-boxes (e.g. Demosthenes) on the side of the main body text which would serve the quotation well, IMO. I am not a S.N. Smith, no. (That would be an awful bit of Googling myself, wouldn't it? In any case, it looks like there are a number of SN Smiths to choose from.) Thank you for the discussion! Geuiwogbil (Talk) 03:01, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I have moved the quotation down. I like it, but we need to give readers a lead which clearly describes the fruit in question. This is a reference work that quickly tells readers what they're reading about. FCYTravis (talk) 20:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I am going to move the quote back. The reason for this is that there was a discussion and an agreement was arrived at and I like that. -- Carol 09:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by CarolSpears (talk • contribs)
Carol, I'm sorry, but the Manual of Style is clear on this - we have to give readers a clear, encyclopedic opening. I don't see any "agreement" here. The quotation is great, but it cannot lead off the article. FCYTravis (talk) 19:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
I just moved the quote back. When you have the time to rewrite the article (it is structured to have the quote where I put it and if you look at where you put it, it was really out of place) I will not interfer with you. Is there a manual of style for wikipedians in which there is the suggestion that it takes more than an opinion -- that perhaps a little effort needs to be included? I have a very difficult time making an opinion about the work of others. After putting some effort into quite a few things, the appreciation of the effort tends to naturally grow. So, when you rewrite the article to fit whichever of style guides you adhere to here, I will not undo what you have done. Thank you for the few seconds you took from your life to move one chunk of text in this article. -- Carol 20:27, 31 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by CarolSpears (talk • contribs)


I've created a new "nutrition" section (maybe not the best title, but that can be fixed) to hold the quote. It's a good quote about their nutritional value. FCYTravis (talk) 20:24, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
You should wait until you have the time to do this correctly. All of the documentation about how to document seems to allow messing things up and not allow to do a good job of it -- at least from what I can see. Please consider doing a nice and complete edit. Carol 20:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by CarolSpears (talk • contribs)
I am going to check back in a few minutes. If you do not have the time to put more effort into this, I am going to put things back the way I had them. The changes that you made look really not impressive and I do not think that the style guide intended for the articles to seem not impressive in order to fit into the suggestions made by the style guide. -- Carol 20:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by CarolSpears (talk • contribs)
Carol, respectfully, I would urge you not to continue edit warring here or elsewhere over your quotes until you discuss it fully first. Reverting once more on this page today will constitute a violation of the three revert rule and you may be blocked for disruptive edits. You have been given this information before so I expect that you understand the three revert rule. --Rkitko (talk) 21:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)