Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Thomcord/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Laser brain 16:55, 8 February 2011 [1].

Thomcord edit

Thomcord (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): – VisionHolder « talk » 17:55, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I believe this short article fulfills the FAC requirements. The article has received an expert review by the one of the men who created this grape variety, Dr. Ramming. During the GAN, two additional sources were listed, but I have access to neither. I have good reason to suspect that they contain little or no new information. (If these sources could be sent to me, I will gladly review them and add whatever is needed.) Otherwise, it's a very straightforward, simple article that has also been reviewed by members of the WP:Food and WP:Wine projects. – VisionHolder « talk » 17:55, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig/External Link check - no dabs, one circular redirect- Thomcord (grape) (in the template at the bottom), no dead external links. --PresN 22:03, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the circular redirect. Sorry, thought I had already fixed that. – VisionHolder « talk » 01:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support I know little about grapes so please consider a few issues from a non expert:

Lead

  • What is an "aborted seed"? They are mentioned several times in the article but I can't see it explained or wikilinked.
    Wikilinked to Seedless fruit. Is that sufficient? Explaining might require its own sentence, especially since most people aren't familiar with how seedless fruits are created or how the seeds are usually there, but not developed for one of a couple possible reasons. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What does "The plant is not restricted for propagation and distribution" mean - what sort of restrictions are not applied?
    Apparently there are federal regulations restricting the spread of plants in horticulture. This helps reduce the risk of invasive species. However, the sources don't provide any more details, and I am personally ignorant as to which specific regulations they are referring to. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I have brought up this question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wine to see if they could offer some insight. – VisionHolder « talk » 03:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I have provided a tentative wikilink to a stub that needs development. I have also posted a question as WP:PLANT, with the hopes they might have something better. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:33, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Plant quarantine works for me.— Rod talk 08:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Description

  • In the text it is described as having "blue-black skin" and yet in the infobox it is "noir" and in the table "Purple/Blue" - are these the same thing?
    That was a limitation of the infobox per {{Infobox grape variety}}. I will inquire on the talk page and get back to you when I know more. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    There is still a difference between "blue-black" in the text and "Purple/Blue" in the table - beyond ant issues with the infobox.— Rod talk 08:51, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure where I got "Purple/Blue" from. I have followed the primary source for the article a little more closely in the table. Otherwise, the "noir" question has yet to be answered at the template, although I have brought it up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wine. – VisionHolder « talk » 03:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I have now made a change to the {{Infobox grape variety}} template so that "Blue-black" now lists as the color of the berry. – VisionHolder « talk » 00:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the statement "Concord in taste ("labrusca")" should the species name come immediately after Concord?
    The source used the term "labrusca" as an adjective to describe the taste, apparently a common trend when talking about the numerous grape varieties. Basically, the Concord grape (V. labrusca) has a distinct flavor, which is sometimes known as "labrusca" flavor. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Thomcord is suitable to" should this be "suitable for" or "suitable in"?
    Fixed. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Production details

  • In the first line we see "yielding up to 13–16 kg" and later "as much as 30 to 32 kg (66 to 71 lb) per vine" and "average of 15.1 kg (33 lb)" while later "averaging 21.3 kg (47 lb) per vine" I got confused by this.
    Unfortunately, the source isn't very clear on this. All it says for the heavier weight comes from "grower trials". I've sent an email asking Dr. Ramming for a clarification, but the reply could take a week or more. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Wow! That was a quick reply from Dr. Ramming. The good news is that I now know the answer. The bad news is that it's not in any of the sources. Basically, the first (smaller) numbers refers to vines grown using bilateral cordon (2 arms) with spurs, while the second (larger) numbers refers to vines grown using quadrilateral (4 arms) with spurs, which effectively doubles the growing area for the vine. I've asked Dr. Ramming if another source might support this information as a reference, but I'm not holding my breath. I'm open for suggestions on how to handle this. In the meantime, I'll be contemplating the situation... – VisionHolder « talk » 23:14, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I don't think we're going to be able to resolve this one with a RS, so I'm just going to delete the larger number since the circumstances that led to the difference were not given in any of the sources. Sad loss. – VisionHolder « talk » 03:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is "medium to slightly loose tightness" a technical term?
    From what I gathered from the literature, I assume so. It's referring to how tightly the grapes are clustered together. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I have brought up this question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wine as well. – VisionHolder « talk » 03:04, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    It turns out that there are more technical terms, and that what I used was probably the most understandable. However, I've used alternate wording to explain what the phrase means technnically, and I have red-linked to an article that WP:WINE hopes to create eventually. This is probably overboard, so feel free to revert of modify as needed. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:33, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Berry length and diameter is given "in tests between 2001 and 2002" is this likely to have changed? - also is a reference needed for this fact?
    First question: berry quality will depend upon the growing season, so yes, it can change, but on a year-to-year basis. That's probably why they gave data for multiple years. As for the references, reference #1 is used for the entire paragraph. Per the other FACs I've gone through, I've been taught to not be redundant in my references within a paragraph if the reference doesn't change. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should girdling be wikilinked or explained (for the ignorant amongst us)?
    Excellent catch. To be honest, I thought the term meant something else because I'm used to plants being killed by girdling. I had to read the article to learn that you can use the technique to sacrifice a branch to make fruits grow larger in some cases. Interesting! (Sorry, I'm not a grape expert. This article is a little out of my area of expertise as well.) – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

History

  • "ARS' grape-breeding research in California, which dates back to 1923, where research has created new varieties of red, white, and black grapes for both hobbyists and professional growers" appears to be very close paraphrasing of "ARS' grape-breeding research in California dates back to 1923. Over the years, the research has yielded new varieties of red, white and black grapes for hobbyist and professional growers." in Ref 2 - perhaps reword.
    Fair enough. Let me know if it looks better. – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Availability

  • "The FPS offers virus-free propagation material that has been certified virus-free." Is there an alternative way of saying "virus-free" on the second occasion in this sentence.
    Ummm.... Oops!  ;-) – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article relies on just five references - this may be because it is still quite new but are there alternative sources which could help to substantiate the content?— Rod talk 21:25, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from what I stated above in the FAC listing, I cannot find a single thing outside of sales ads and opinions on forums/blogs. Maybe someday soon it will gain momentum and start appearing in the supermarkets. When and if that happens, I expect to have a lot more material to work from. But for now, this appears to be all I have to work with. I wouldn't have even brought the article to FAC if I hadn't found that technically detailed article by Dr. Ramming, but that seems to cover all the important information about the grape itself. Anyway, thanks for the review! – VisionHolder « talk » 22:50, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, I have made a request for the two sources at WP:LIB, but have not heard anything back. Aside from the remote chance that these articles might have a new tidbit, was there anything else that needed to be addressed that I've overlooked? – VisionHolder « talk » 20:52, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
All looks good now so changed to support.— Rod talk 08:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Images All licenses seem appropriate Fasach Nua (talk) 17:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - As peculiar as it feels to support an article with just five references, this meets the criteria as far as I'm concerned. ceranthor 15:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I've assisted Visionholder in answering some of the viticulture and jargon questions so I'm not 100% unobjective here. But I will point out that this is an outstanding article on a subject that doesn't get a lot of attention on Wikipedia and is very difficult to find reliable sources on (despite the subject matter's notability). As a member of WP:WINE, I'm not ashamed to say that this short article on a newly developed table grape not only dwarfs other table grapes articles in Category:Table grapes but is also heads and heels in quality over many wine grape articles. All the credit to that goes to Visionholder who has turned what little was available into something that Wikipedia should be proud to feature as an FA. AgneCheese/Wine 20:48, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: an excellent overview of a limited subject. Images and sources look good to me. Ucucha 02:51, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Article is of excellent quality. While the references are limited, they are also of high quality. I was the reviewer for GA-status and I found that this is possibly one of the best articles on grapes on the English Wikipedia. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Thomcord/archive1&oldid=1091467214"