Talk:Chili pepper/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 15:03, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: BigChrisKenney (talk · contribs) 08:32, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello! This is the first time reviewing a longer article, but I hope we can get this (back?) to GA status. I have seen on your user page that this is a rewrite of the article.

• It's never been at GAN before; "rewrite" means I ... went through the text.

Let's dive in!

Lead

“...varieties of the berry-fruit of plants from the…”

• could change this to “…varieties of berry-fruit plants from the….” so that it reads smoother.
  • Done.

“Chili peppers are believed to have originated in Central or South America and were first cultivated in Mexico. ”

• This sentence contradicts the first sentence (which is cited) under the history header. I’d take out “…are believed to have…” Source one and two says it originated in the New world.
  • Done.

Throughout the article, there are mentions to the chili being spicy or hot and the word is used interchangeably at times. Under the section ‘Safety’ the two words are used in sentences back to back. It might be worth replacing the word hot with spicy, except in the case of hot sauce. Even through in American English, the terms are used interchangeably, it would be best if we could use one term across the whole article.

• This isn't a dictionary, we're trying to be readable and no standards have been contravened. I think the usage is fine as it is, but I've replaced one mention with the word "chili" in 'Safety' to show willing.

There is also mention of chilis and chilies, I edited the article to have the uniform chilies as it was more prevalent. Changing chilies to chili ’’’peppers’’’ would work as well,

• Many thanks.

History

Origins

“Chili peppers were cultivated in east-central Mexico some 6,000 years ago.[3][4][3] Chili plants were first cultivated independently across different locations in the Americas including highland Peru and Bolivia, central Mexico, and the Amazon.[5]”

• These two sentences could be combined. “Chili peppers were cultivated independently in east-central Mexico some 6,000 years ago across different locations including highland Peru and Bolivia, central Mexico, and the Amazon.” Would also need to remove the double source cite [3] at the end of “…6,000 years ago”
  • Edited.
• You could even combine the last three sentences in that paragraph.
  • Not sure about that, but edited a bit more.

Distribution to Europe

Good.

Distribution o the rest of the world

Good.

Producing chili peppers

Cultivation

“...glasshouse red spider mite, and glasshouse whitefly,…”

• Is the word ‘glasshouse’ needed here? In the source, it mentions ‘glasshouse’ before the species’ name, but their corresponding Wikipedia pages do not mention ‘glasshouse’ in their name, and not at all on the red spider mite page. Consider removal?
  • I'd say that following the source is helpful, not least because it indicates the environment where the species becomes a pest. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:58, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Preparation

The first paragraph only mentions one way to dry chilies - on string. Many people around the world sun dry chilies on a flat surface as well. More ways to dry them could be added. I know the picture captions mention different ways to dry them, but writing it out as well would be good.

• Edited.

“...usually bottled ‘’’when’’’ commercially available…”

• Is ‘when’ the correct word here or where?
  • Edited.

I made small edits you may wish to review.

• Thanks.

Annual production

Table is good.

Good

Species and cultivars

How do you feel about a hyperlink on the word ’Capsicum’ here?

• Added.

Intensity

Capsaicin

• Consider changing the word ‘pod’ to fruit as this is the only time the word ‘pod’ is mentioned in this article. The main article, capsaicin, also uses it only once, odd.
  • Done.

“When a habanero plant is stressed, by absorbing low water for example, the concentration of capsaicin increases in some parts of the fruit.”

• While not wrong, I find myself wanting this sentence to be reworded. You may or may not wish to do so.
  • Edited.

“However, birds are unable to perceive the hotness and so they can eat some of the hottest peppers.”

• Can we get a citation? - can use the same source from citation 66?
  • Added.

• The phrase ‘spice heat’ gives me pause. While this phrase is used in the Wikipedia article Scoville scale, it is not used in the source article. It makes me think that the SHU is used for measuring other spices like cinnamon, cumin, or cardamom.
  • Those spices are not hot. The term is sensible as we're not talking about thermodynamic heat here.

Intensity range of commonly-used cultivars

Should this and the section be merged together in the same table with the formatting of the latter?

• Seems ok.

Hottest by country

I disagree with the note here, but perhaps you feel differently?

• Probably outdated, removed.

I think there can be something to be said about adding a section on the competition of breeding the spiciest pepper in the world. If a section were to be added, adding it around here might be good.

• We've probably said enough for the purposes of this article, indeed we've already gone rather far in a "popular" direction for a serious agricultural and historical article.

As food

“a rich source of vitamin C and vitamin B6 (table).”

• Is the word ‘(table)’ needed here?
  • No, it was there before I added the table ref.

Pungency

Good

Cooking

In the first paragraph, do you think providing a proper way to efficiently remove capsaicin from skin, would be wise?

• • No easy method; avoidance is best.

“Chilies are best roasted over very hot coals or grill for a short time, as they break up if overcooked.”

• I’m not sure if this should be in the article. The source used the word ‘best’ when talking about ways to roast chilies, not as a way to cook them, which this sentence insinuates. Perhaps just simply omitting the words ‘are best’ and replacing them with ‘can’ would suffice.
  • Done.

I made an edit you may wish to review.

OK.

Regional cuisines

I believe some words should be in italics.

• The chili variety names seem to be naturalised in English.

Also, should there be hyperlinks to the different peppers you listed? That’s a lot of links, but I’ve seen many successive links in other articles.

• Added.

Citation 55, is this a proper source?

• The cooking sources? I'd say they were ok in this context, they're very unlikely to be lying.

Other Uses

Ornamental plants

Citation 60, is this a proper source?

• Replaced.

Constrained risk-taking

Good

Topical use and health research

• What is here is good, is there more that can be added?
  • No, we have to be terribly careful with medical claims.

Chemical irritants

• In the first paragraph, would mentioning how the products could be misused or cause injury be worthwhile?
  • Probably going a bit far for a plant article; we have articles on the weapons already.

Etymology and spelling

“Chilli was the original Romanization of the Náhuatl language word for the fruit (chilli)”

• Did you mean “…for the fruit (chīlli),”?
  • Yes. Reviewers are welcome to fix minor items of that sort.

Safety

Good

In popular culture

• What is here is good, is there more that can be added?
  • Maybe; the trouble is that pop. sources aren't WP:RS.

See also

Good

Notes

Good

References

I have gone through most of the references and am only concerned about 55 and 60. Could you check them for validity.

• Replaced the second one, I believe, while the first one seems ok ... if not, do name the author/date of the paper concerned.

I hope my comments can be of some help!

Thanks for reading and I look forward to working with you.BigChrisKenney (talk) 08:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks, all done to date. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:33, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

I have reviewed your changes and did a few edits and added a couple of hyperlinks. Let me know what you think. BigChrisKenney (talk) 05:03, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

That's fine with me. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

I am satisfied with the correspondence and believe that any issues that have been brought up have been resolved.

Final Assessment

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (references):
   b (citations to reliable sources):
   c (OR):
   d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects):
   b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

@Chiswick Chap: Plus one GA to you! Thank you for your hard work and dedication to article creation! I'm sure we will cross paths in the future. BigChrisKenney (talk) 07:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)