Talk:Coffee varieties

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Similarties to page on sfbayaxis.com

This article is almost an exact copy of this article: San Francisco Bay Area Coffee - Varietals Explained

tisk tisk, right you are. Spose it needs to be deleted then....what's the process? LilDice 04:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Interesting. That article is particularly close, though not identical, to the original version of the article. However, I wonder if it's not an issue of that site copying from wikipedia instead. Take a look at the linked text at the top of their page Varietal Coffee Explained. It's a link to the April 4th version of the wikipedia page. And it looks like that's the identical version. I would think that if this page started as a copy of the sfbayaxis site, the identical version would be the initial one.
Further, the original author has been an active editor in good standing for quite some time now, so I would be surprised if this were an instance of the wiki article being a copyvio. I'll ask him to weigh in on the issue though. ScottW 16:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
The text in the "coffee varietals" page used to be in the Coffee article. My involvement was taking it and splitting it out into this article to avoid cluttering up the main article. The text as it existed was already here when I did that, so I can't say for sure whether we copied sfbayaxis or they copied us. Nandesuka 17:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Verified sfbayaxis.com stole from Wikipedia

I went back and checked the main Coffee article, you can see the evolution of this section here - http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Coffee&oldid=24697519 LilDice 05:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Coffee production error

I removed a line that states that Columbia is the second largest coffee producer. This contradicts the Wikipedia page that lists the world's major coffee producers where Columbia is 4th behind Brazil, Vietnam, and Indonesia. Perhaps Columbia is the 2nd highest in terms of Arabica production, but I really am not sure. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bescheurt (talk • contribs) 21:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

Fixed this, what article had the chart on? Things can change depending on the conditions each year, but we should update the bad page also. LilDice 22:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

"Economics of Coffee" has the world producers of coffee. It references the UN FAO, which I trust. Vietnam has been ahead of Columbia in terms of coffee production for years now. Also the reference added is not valid. Clearly, Germany is not #3 in coffee production. Those numbers only reference to total value of coffee trade, not production. The UN source is more valid ---Bescheurt

The source I added is UN/WTO (The International Trade Centre (ITC) is the technical cooperation agency of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) for operational, enterprise-oriented aspects of trade development.). But yeah that is based on the value of the coffee...which is what you usually talk about, not the weight. LilDice 00:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The map is not clear

Map extremely hard to understand.

I've noticed that the map used cannot be understood. The colours are too similar to a colourblind person like me so I cannot tell which parts of the world grow the particular varities of coffee.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.228.224 (talk) 03:29, 22 April 2007 (UTC) (Comment moved from top of page, signature manually reconstructed from the history by --Chris Jefferies (talk) 07:44, 30 May 2008 (UTC))

Inaccuracies in the coffee production map image

There are many countries shown in the map, which produce a great amount of arabica, such as Indonesia, but are shown only to produce robusta. There are also countries shown on the map to only produce arabica which do also produce very fine robustas, such as Guatemala and Mexico. Unless the map is displayed simply to demonstrate that different countries produce different amounts of robusta and arabica, the map is useless or even misleading and needs to be updated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.251.17.190 (talk) 20:15, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Varietals?

Does anyone know the origin of this term? Is it a traditional and widely accepted word in the world of coffee growing?

The reason I ask is that it is grammatically incorrect. The word 'varietal' is an adjective and should not normally be used as a noun. It should be varietal something, for example 'varietal differences'. The title of the article should be 'Coffee varieties' unless 'coffee varietals' is already widely used.

If indeed it is widely accepted we should keep the name but explain the usage in the article, with citations if possible. But if it's not widely accepted we should rename the article using correct English.--Chris Jefferies 14:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

As there has been no comment on this for more than six months I plan to be proactive and rename the article. I propose either 'Coffee varieties' or 'Coffee cultivars'. Cultivar is almost certainly to be preferred. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisjj (talk • contribs) 15:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

While reading around the topic a bit more in preparation for the name change, I've discovered that this strange term 'varietals' is quite common in the coffee trade, also in the wine trade. Probably best to leave it alone after all in that case. What a pity nobody else pointed that out some time during the last six months. --Chris Jefferies (talk) 23:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

In the context of the content at present the term is used incorrectly in any case. 'Varietals' of Arabica would refer to 'Kent', 'Bourbon', 'Pacamara' or similar variety of coffea arabica. At present many of the items presented as 'varietals' are simply regional names derived from the area in which the coffee is grown - such as 'Jamaica Blue Mountain'. (Gb grendel (talk) 12:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC))
This article is highly erroneous. The term varietal (also "cultivar" or "variety") is used to refer to a specific sub-species, mutation, or hybrid of the species C. Arabica or C. Canephora (aka Robusta). The "varietals" listed in this article are technically referred to within the specialty coffee industry as "origins" and have little to do with the varietal. 18:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)68.79.219.34 (talk)

I've done a little research on this. Google searches for "coffee varietals", "coffee varieties", and "coffee cultivars" yield 5010, 89 300, and 2480 hits respectively (on 28th May 2008). On that basis it looks as if we should change the article name to 'Coffee varieties' and note that the correct botanical term 'cultivar' is not often used and that the term 'varietal' is also sometimes used. --Chris Jefferies (talk) 23:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] No mention of the Philippines

According to this page (http://www.da.gov.ph/agribiz/coffee.html), the Philippines "is one of the few countries where all four varieties of coffee are grown on a commercial scale." It is also an exporting member of the International Coffee Organization and yet, the Philippines is not highlighted on the coffee map. How can we update the map? Does anyone know? I'm not really a wiki contributor so I don't know that much about uploading files.

[edit] Requested move

Note - Some discussion has already taken place above under the heading 'Varietals?'. Further discussion on whether or not to move (rename) this page should take place here instead. --Chris Jefferies (talk) 09:55, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone monitoring this page object to renaming the article 'Coffee varieties'? Now is the time to speak up, and this section is the right place :-) --Chris Jefferies (talk) 15:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

An admin (Nancy) completed the move recently. Many thanks, much appreciated. I will now remove the notice from the talk page. --Chris Jefferies (talk) 07:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)