Talk:History of saffron

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured article star History of saffron is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Featured topic star History of saffron is part of the "Saffron" series (project page), a featured topic identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 26, 2007.
Peer review This History article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale (comments).

Contents

[edit] V0.5 review

This is a high quality article, but I don't think its subject is of sufficient significance to be included in WP:V0.5, which is intended more for must-have articles. I'm moving this article to the held nominations page so that it will be considered for a later release broader in scope. -- bcasterline • talk 05:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

This article states saffron is native to southeast Asia; the saffron article states recent biological research shows it is native to Crete, not central Asia as was previously believed. Which is accurate?

Saffron is a triploid mutation of Crocus cartwrightianus, a species native to the Aegean. "Human selection" given prominence in the text was secondary, as Minoans selected for cultivation only those mutated triploid corms with extra-long carpels: you can select forever without a resultant mutation. The Acrotiri frescoes demostrate that saffron crocus were cultivated in the Minoan civilization in the Aegean; this is not "Greece" [sic]. A "Greco-Roman classical period (8th century BC to the 3rd century AD)" is a misunderstanding of what "Classical Period" signifies. And the Song of Solomon is not 'three millennia" old. Not brilliant in the biology nor in the history. --Wetman (talk) 05:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Citations

What's with the weird looking citations? Harvey100 00:42, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

The article's nothing to do with me, but if you'll pardon the question, what's weird about the citations? 4u1e 11:14, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I thought the citations were pretty cool, actually (if a citation style can ever be called "cool"). Is there a page that explains how to do that? Coemgenus 15:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A few suggestions

This is an excellently written article, and obviously has a very good visual layout as well. However, I wonder why a few things weren't mentioned in its Featured Article candidacy.

1. I imagine that saffron production and use has expanded in the past century, yet this article has little to say beyond the 1800s.

2. There are a significant number of references listed, but the citations are almost all from one source (Willard 2001). Isn't this too much reliance on one book?

Thanks, Joshdboz 02:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Improving this article

I was under the impression that Featured Articles were vigorously vetted, as with Palladian architecture. A mailing-list thread full of leads for correcting some of the text here may be followed starting with this post. The November posts continue the dialogue. Triploidy, the Aegean origin, the sterility of C. sativus etc all affect the story.--Wetman 03:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

The text from your first link reads:

After much delay the first 2 saffron flowers opened -FINALLY- yesterday. Anyone else with Crocus sativus in bloom now? Should be many more to follow soon, judging from spring foliage. This seemed like it is a late season for this species.

I don't see how this one anecdote seriously challenges anything in the article. As for the second link, I see no mention of Wikipedia or its articles—no examination of its content. Even if there was, the onus would still be on you to provide reliable and verifiable sources, as this article does. But I'm still glad to see that you are interested in fact-checking this article. Thanks. Saravask 16:31, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Indeed no "challenge" was intended, merely some interesting education on the subject of saffron. Perhaps, I hope, others will have more curiosity than Saravask, to follow the thread that was so inauspiciously begun. From the article: "Human cultivators bred C. cartwrightianus specimens by selecting for plants with abnormally long stigmas." This is not how triploidy occurs. "Saffron was first documented in a 7th-century BC Assyrian botanical reference." The frescos of Akrotiri are also documents. "the Greco-Roman classical period (8th century BC to the 3rd century AD)," What is "classical" about the eighth or seventh centuries BCE? "Saffron slowly spread.." Saffron does not "spread"; it must be divided and reset, thus showing human interference etc etc. "They portray a Greek goddess" No, a Minoan goddess. "...for use in the manufacture of a therapeutic drug." There is no such indication: the use might be ritual, etc. "saffron harvests there were severely curtailed" following the eruption, this is an understatement with a comic flavor. "Crocus and Smilax" A sentimental Hellenistic anecdote written in Latin for a Roman audience. It's not myth. "saffron only returned to France with 8th-century Moors" Moorish raiders did not plant saffron at Poitiers. Saffron remains where it's been established: see Saffron Walden. P. Willard's offhand references would be easily traced directly to Pliny and Galen et al. ...There's much to do before this deserves its "Featured" status..--Wetman 07:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bitter taste, hay-like fragrance, slight metallic notes?

It's difficult to describe how saffron takes, but I can't relate to the currently description at all. I use lots of saffron, up to 1 g in a meal, but I've never noticed bitterness or metallic notes, and for me the fragrance has no connection with hay. Can anybody think of a better description? Groogle 02:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)