Talk:Tomato
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tomato article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
Tomato has been listed as one of the Agriculture, food and drink good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 23, 2024. (Reviewed version). |
This level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 28, 2004. |
pronunciation and great vowel shift
[edit]According to the Great Vowel Shift page, [aː] became [eɪ]. In other words, /pətɑːtoʊ/ became /pəteɪtoʊ/. The tomato didn't change from /təmeɪtoʊ/ to /təmɑːtoʊ/, it changed from /təmɑːtoʊ/ to /təmeɪtoʊ/.
Therefore "The British pronunciation was like the American until the Great Vowel Shift" is nonsense. 58.80.201.106 (talk) 08:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Removed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
South America or North America
[edit]The article begins mentioning it’s South American origins, but then goes along and only describes it’s use in Mesoamérica and the Aztec territories. 2806:107E:A:BDE7:E81B:241C:B618:5F9 (talk) 14:13, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- Which is where more is known about it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:46, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
Totally generic eukaryote spiel is off-topic for this article
[edit]User:Yopienso, you have now completely wrongly started an edit-war, ignoring WP:BRD - you Boldly proposed a change, I Reverted it with a strong reason, and you should definitely have either Dropped it or come here to Discuss it. So, take a triple trouting with a wet towel and an embedded three-week-old trout attached, and don't ever do that again. I will once again revert you per status quo ante, i.e. you cannot gain an advantage by trying to force a wholly wrong change on an established article. I'll explain, again, in detail, why the change is unacceptable.
You have now (twice, unacceptably) pushed a wholly generic text into this article. The article is about a single species. Every species in that genus, Solanum, has the same mechanism. So it does not belong in the species article. Every genus in that family, Solanaceae, has the the same mechanism. So it does not belong in the genus article. Ditto for the Order, Solanales. Ditto for all the flowering plants, the Angiosperms. Ditto for all the kingdom of Plants (380,000 species). Ditto for all the Domain of Eukaryotes (millions of species). It's not just a little itsy-witsy bit wrongy-wongy, it's outrageously, rampantly, glaringly out of place.
You simply can't be thinking that it would be remotely appropriate to add your 921 bytes to each of 380,000 plant articles (or however many of them have articles, certainly many tens of thousands), it would be utterly absurd, and it would get you permanently blocked for massively disruptive editing. It makes no sense to spread something that can be said once, at the top, in the right place, down at the bottom (individual species), thousands and thousands of times.
Equally, you can't possibly be right in imagining that the Tomato article is specially, indeed uniquely privileged by the need to have it explained, again, what meiosis is all about, that somehow this one out of hundreds of thousands of Eukaryote articles deserves to have all that spiel repeated down here, but not in all the other articles at the same level. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and you perfectly well know it, or would if you thought about it for a nanosecond. It's not sensible, and the addition is not acceptable. That's all there is to it.
Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hi! Thank you for working to improve this article.
- You seem to be confused about my one edit here. Perhaps you were thinking that User:Haley275 and I are the same person? We're not. I hadn't edited this article since July 2. So no worries, I'm not edit warring with you.
- Please dispose of your fish since the smell is bothering me a little. Best wishes, YoPienso (talk) 19:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, different person, same material. Happy to chuck the trout on the compost heap, or bury it under the heap in fact, but my thoughts about the material remain as above. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- It's all good. YoPienso (talk) 19:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Cheers! Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:59, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- It's all good. YoPienso (talk) 19:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, different person, same material. Happy to chuck the trout on the compost heap, or bury it under the heap in fact, but my thoughts about the material remain as above. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
- Wikipedia good articles
- Agriculture, food and drink good articles
- GA-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Biology and health sciences
- GA-Class vital articles in Biology and health sciences
- GA-Class plant articles
- High-importance plant articles
- WikiProject Plants articles
- GA-Class Agriculture articles
- High-importance Agriculture articles
- WikiProject Agriculture articles
- GA-Class Food and drink articles
- Top-importance Food and drink articles
- WikiProject Food and drink articles
- GA-Class Indigenous peoples of the Americas articles
- Mid-importance Indigenous peoples of the Americas articles
- Indigenous peoples of the Americas articles
- Selected anniversaries (September 2004)