Talk:List of vegetable oils

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured list star List of vegetable oils is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
List of vegetable oils 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.
Featured list FL This article has been rated as FL-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance 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.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
List of vegetable oils is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.
Maintained The following user(s) are actively involved with this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
Waitak (talk • contribs • email)
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.
To-do list for List of vegetable oils: edit · history · watch · refresh

Contents

[edit] Drying agent

Dammar oil is a drying agent, not a dessicant. A dessicant works by removing moisture, while a drying oil like dammar oil works by pulling oxygen out of the air and using it in autoxidation.

The problem was a link to an ill-considered redirect, which was quite reasonably replaced with direct link. I've replaced the Drying agent redirection with a disambiguation page. ClairSamoht 04:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

My apologies for that. I started the article drying agent not long ago, as a basic list of laboratory drying agents. I found a similar article, desiccant, and decided to merge the info there to prevent duplication, even though I very much prefer the term "drying agent". I didn't know the context for dammar oil was different. --Rifleman 82 06:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey, no reason for apologies. I should be thanking you instead. Thanks. "Many hands make for light work." Or, in this case, better work. I'm sure there are many people who think the reason you would use a drying oil instead of, say, alcohol, as a drying agent in paint is that alcohols tend to evaporate and oils don't. The result is that we got the Drying agent page, which otherwise I never would have thought to create. ClairSamoht 14:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Essential oils

I would have thought that essential oils would rate a subsection in this article.--Peta 00:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

List of essential oils started as a subsection of this article. I moved it to its own article for three reasons:
  • The article was already getting very long
  • Essential oils and vegetable fat oils are different enough that it made sense to give each their own article
  • There were a lot of essential oils that don't have an article, and I didn't want to have to write all of them to apply for featured list status
Nothing against them at all! --Waitak 00:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Now I see, I missed the mention in the lead. It might be a good idea to include the link to the list again in the see also section.--Peta

[edit] mergefrom Saturated fat (section) to List of vegetable oils

The folks over at Saturated fat have come up with a table listing fat composition of (mostly) vegetable oils. This isn't well placed right at Saturated fat because this is more general information about oils, with mono- and poly-unsaturated values as well. However the information is useful and would complement this list, particularly if the list were to be reformatted as a table. -- cmhTC 14:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for thinking of us! I'm wondering if this wouldn't be a better fit in Vegetable fats and oils, though. It doesn't seem that it fits in a list article as well as it would in a general article on the subject. Maybe it could even be an article on its own? Or perhaps a template so that it can be reused in more than one place? Thoughts, anybody? Waitak 15:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I will agree that it doesn't fit in this list article, but a third of the list consists of animal fats, and it doesn't belong in the Vegetable fats and oils article, either.
You know, the problem is that all this stuff doesn't fit neatly. It makes sense to discuss mineral oils, organic oils, and triglycerides separately, because the chemistry is different. It makes sense to discuss macerated oils separately, too, because it's not the oil that matters so much as the chemicals that are "polluting" the oil.
But from the standpoint of a chemist/chemical_engineer, animal/vegetable and fat/oil are distinctions that are pretty artificial. You've got three fatty acids clinging to glycerine, and it doesn't really matter where the fatty acids came from, just which fatty acids they are, and in what order they are connected. Now, when you saturate an oil, you tend to preferentially saturate the fatty acids on the end of the chain, because the middle one is "protected" by the other two, but still, you can find molecules that *accidently* have that arrangement in nature, and you can fractionate the oil to get *only* those molecules....
And then you get adjectives like "edible", "industrial", "drying", "salad", "cooking", etc., that are also essentially meaningless. I mean, if you want to buy a rail car of margarine oil, that's a useful distinction, as is telling the guy at the car dealership that you want a "muscle car" or an "econobox", but the folks down at the bureau of motor vehicles don't recognize those distinctions.
And if we were starting from scratch, and didn't have all these hours of manpower invested in the existing articles, it'd surely make sense to organize the articles differently.
Oops. Did it again. I gotta get more sleep, so I don't pop off so much. As Emily Litella would say, "Excuse me." The rest of you will find an suitable solution, and I'll live with it. ClairSamoht 16:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay, so what we usually do in situations like this is:
  • Somebody (hopefully you) makes some concrete suggestions about what would be a better structure for all of these articles.
  • Somebody else (maybe me, who the heck knows?) fleshes it out into something that could actually be built.
  • Anybody who's interested takes a crack at it, including the person who made the suggestion in the first place, until we're all pretty much convinced that it's (a) better and (b) worth the trouble.
  • We get to work and start writing the darned thing.
As a person who's probably invested more than the average editor in the whole shebang, I'll state for the record that I feel pretty unproprietary about what's said where. I'd hate to see List of vegetable oils eviscerated, but I'm up for pretty much anything else.
As for spouting off... we eventually ended up with a featured list one of the last times you did that, so I wouldn't be too hard on m'self, were I you.
Your volley. Go on, you know you want to. :-) Waitak 10:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Back to the {{mergesection}} question: I've put a different version of the table into Fatty acid. It doesn't have quite as many fats, but it has more information on each (includes vitamin E composition). It's also scaled in g/100g, rather than g/Tbsp. Would this be a satisfactory solution to the nice people from Saturated fat who moved the table here in the first place? cmh? AndreasJS? If you don't like it -- or don't like it there -- please feel free to, y'know, be bold.... Waitak 11:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I just found the table on Saturated fat and felt it didn't quite fit the article. My thought was that this list could do more than just enumerate and describe the oils, it could provide some technical data like this as well. However, I'm not wedded to that idea. -- cmhTC 17:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Algal oil

The article credits Isaac Berzin as having invented algal oils for biofuels. I am fairly sure this is inaccurate. The idea of using oil from Algae for fuel has been around at least since the 1970's US Government "Aquatic Species Program", if not before. Please fix. —preceding unsigned comment by Bobkeyes (talk • contribs)

[edit] Citations

Rmvd the bulkoil.com citations per WP:RS and Links normally to be avoided. The small write ups on those pages seem to be coppied from, 3rd parties including wikipedia. Site also contains extensive ad lists "for sale" which clearly are classified solicitations. from the site;

Search for bulk edible oils listed for sale or wanted. Click on the company for company detail. Click on the listing for listing detail. Add your posting to the list. Contact the vendor directly

Also over citing is an issue, since each listed item has its own article to reference, there hardly seems to be a need to cite an external source (nine times) that is infact content found on or from wikipedia. It seems even stranger to need to cite the statements;

  • "Corn oil, a common cooking oil with little odor or taste"
  • "Soybean oil, produced as a byproduct of processing soy meal."

--Hu12 08:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

No, they're actually not. Please let's not get into a revert war here. As I said, this article has undergone a very extensive review process. The "over citing" was done because it's required to have all facts cited for the list to achieve featured list status. It took weeks of hard work to find references for everything that passed muster with the many reviewers. I'm not inclined to watch a major portion of them removed - and the list subsequently be disqualified for featured list status - because a single editor doesn't like them.
Could you please be a little less assertive here? If you have better sources for something, feel free to replace any of the citations. The fact that bulkoil pages include lists of places that you can buy the oils does not in any way detract from the value of the writeups on the oils. There is no Wikipedia policy that I'm aware of that precludes the use of such references. Waitak 08:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, how's this sound? I'm willing to try to replace the Bulk Oil citations over time with other, better ones. I agree that they're minimal, even if I disagree with you regarding whether they fall under WP:RS or not. If you'd agree not to force the issue by continuing to remove them, I'd be grateful. Deal? Waitak 08:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ojon oil

What's "Ojon" oil? From which plant is this oil? Sei Shonagon 02:36, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I've added an entry for it. Thanks for mentioning it. Waitak 16:33, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biofuels : Fantasies for the U S

These are in the long run apparently fantasies. Corn (maize) is one of the most efficient of all plants in capturing solar radiation (sunfall) and yet, in the U S "Cornbelt", averaged on an annual basis, corn captures only 0.7% (7/10ths of 1 percent) of the available sunfall. Furthermore, even this poor performance is available only in the presence of huge amounts of irrigation/rainfall water and very large amounts of petrofertilizer.

Undoubtedly, in the tropics, some better results are possible -- but not in the continental U S.

This observation is made on the basis of information obtained privately from one of the leading agricultural laboratories in the Cornbelt.

So, folks, dust off your solar cells !! . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.178.230 (talk) 14:33, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Organization

First I would like to apologize for starting a conversation I didn't finish. I also hope that no disrespect was felt, as I do think the article if well-written, I just had (and still have) issues with the way the article is laid-out. While the issues aren't necessarily overwhelming, they are fundamental to the article, and not what i would hope to see in a Featured list. I am not an expert in the subject by any means, but would interested parties please take note of Wikipedia:Lists#Organization, as well as the conversation I just mentioned. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 06:49, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the gracious follow-up. As I hope was clear from the response to your FLRC nomination, I certainly took you seriously, and did seek not to respond out of being offended or taking things personally. Hope I succeeded.
The organization of the list as it exists happened roughly as follows:
  • I made an exhaustive list of all of the oils I could find
  • I read about them all, and noted what categories the sources said they belonged to
  • After compiling a list of the main categories that I was seeing over and over, I tried to categorize the whole list using what seemed to be a reasonable compromise, in terms of not having too many categories, while still having enough to cover the ground
No claim that what we've got now is the best categorization, but it is the best that I was able to come up with, so... how about you taking a shot at it (in concrete, not abstract terms) here in the talk page, and we'll see how it looks? As an aside, although it seems pretty easy to make a categorization that's strictly usage/source or source/usage, you could easily end up with some categories with a bazillion entries, and others with one or two - and still not capture what's important about a significant number of oils. That wouldn't help make the list most usable. So... have at it! Waitak (talk) 19:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vernonia oil

I am not sure where to list Vernonia oil. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to be a drying oil, from the writeup. The other reasonable place might be in the "Other oils" section. Would you like to take a shot at it? I'd be happy to look it over after you're done and tweak a bit if required. In particular, it would be great if you could supply a reference that describes the oil, its main properties, and uses. Thanks! Waitak (talk) 01:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
My apologies. You asked, and I didn't check carefully enough, but there already was an entry for Vernonia oil. Apparently I even wrote an article on it so that I'd have something to point to. Completely forgot. Sorry, and thank you for helping! Waitak (talk) 13:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)