Wikipedia

Talk:Rice/Archive 3

< Talk:Rice
Latest comment: 9 months ago by Chiswick Chap in topic Rice domestication
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Ecology

Does anyone know what this refers to under ecology? 

#Lowland, rainfed, which is drought prone, favors medium depth; waterlogged, submergence, and flood prone
#Lowland, irrigated, grown in both the wet season and the dry season
#Deep water or floating rice
#Coastal Wetland
#Upland rice is also known as 'Ghaiya rice', well known for its drought tolerance

I assume it is types of rice, but is really unclear. If anyone knows how to fix that, it would be nice. Richard Manion 18:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RickManion (talk • contribs)


Nice image

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:Woodruff Paddy Fields.jpg shows rice production in california, and shows the watery field. but, the article already has many photos. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 08:50, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Comparison of rice to other major staple foods

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

This table includes a wheat column, but the data appears to be for wheat germ. This same table has been copied into several articles (see my contribs for some others I tagged). I suggest that all the data be verified and then make the table into a separate page which can be transcluded into this and the other articles. Sparkie82 (t•c) 00:16, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Good idea. Wheat germ should be replaced with wheat. Include major staples from all continents, at least the top 10 staples of the world. Go ahead. Cheers, ApostleVonColorado (talk) 00:29, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for reworking the table. I made it into a template and transcluded it into all the staple food articles. Sparkie82 (t•c) 07:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Contradiction?

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

"It is the grain with the third-highest worldwide production, after maize (corn) and wheat, according to data for 2009.[1]

Since a large portion of maize crops are grown for purposes other than human consumption, rice is the most important grain with regard to human nutrition and caloric intake, providing more than one fifth of the calories consumed worldwide by the human species.[2]"

Don't these statements contradict each other? Rice may provide more than one fifth of the world's calories, but considering the use of maize for purposes other than human consumption, wouldn't that make wheat the most important grain for human nutrition? If there isn't a contradiction, clarification would be helpful, especially since these statements are adjacent.--BDD (talk) 20:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Counterfactual information regarding top yields, 2009.

Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The Oklahoma State University report cited for the most productive rice farms only includes the top 6 world producers (http://nue.okstate.edu/crop_information/world_wheat_production.htm). China's yield was 6.59 Mt/ha, but the United States yield was not included in the report, as it was not a top producer. According to the USDA, US rice yields measured 7,085 lb/ac in 2009 (http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_Subject/result.php?136DFF6B-5C0B-30BC-BB56-04D882BF3E46&sector=CROPS&group=FIELD%20CROPS&comm=RICE). Converted to Mt/ha, the 2009 US yield was 7.93 tonnes per hectare.

First time contributing, hope I didn't upset any protocol, apologies if I did. 98.208.86.246 (talk) 05:09, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Your comments are most welcome. I am not sure where in this article you read top yield data was based on top 6 producers. The relevant section is World's most productive rice farms and farmers. It notes that Australia, with 10.8 MT/ha leads the world, which is higher than the US yield you calculated for 2009 (and from the source you provide, even 2012 yield for the United States). The Australia data is based on FAOSTAT worldwide crop yield database. If you find another source, please do share and help improve this article. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 00:05, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
Just saw the line you were referring to in the production section. Reworded it to clarify it. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 00:16, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

SRI and Integrated Rice and Duck Farming

Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Both the system of rice intensification and the integrated rice and duck farming method (see http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/news/leopold-letter/2002/spring/duck-power-and-tale-success-six-acres-ecosystem , http://www.architectsofchange.tv/television-program/to-innovate-is-to-immitate/takao-furuno-japan/biography#3;0 , http://permaculturenews.org/2009/03/07/the-one-duck-revolution/ , http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/MaeWanHo/bird99.html ) should be mentioned in the article and links should be present to the articles in question. Please add them 91.182.170.213 (talk) 08:31, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Ottomans Introducing rice into the Balkans.

Latest comment: 11 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

In the section about the history of rice, it is stated that the Ottomans introduced rice into the Balkans as it was unknown before then. I don't know what this really means whether they introduced the cultivation of rice or the plant itself... Actually rice was known to the ancient Greeks, then their descendants the Greek Byzantines and other peoples of the balkans. The word "Oryza" is attested in Liddle and Scott's Classical Greek dictionary for the rice plant and its grain, so how can the Ottomans introduce something that was already known? It is well attested then that the Byzantines knew of rice as per the Persians and the Indians, given the trade routes. The ancients knew of rice wine too: Ref. ὄρυζ-α, ἡ, rice, Oryza sativa, both the plant and the grain, Str.15.1.13, Aristobul.ib.18, Dsc.2.95; ὄ. ἑφθή = the rice-food of the Indians, Megasth.28; οἶνος ἐξ ὀρύζης = wine from rice Ael.NA13.8:— also ὄρυζον, τό, Thphr. HP4.4.10. (v. ὀρίνδης.. http://archimedes.fas.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/dict?name=lsj&lang=el&word=o)%2Fruza&filter=CUTF8 So I'm specifically concerned about that spurious claim that uses ref #38. When a new product is introduced from a dominant cultural period (here read the Ottoman period), it usually follows that the word is adopted but rice, the Greek word Oryza from which all other European words for it derive, is not transmitted from the Turkish/Ottoman, ultimately Persian word (pirinç/pirindze) but from Tamil through intermediary Sanskritic far, farther in the past than the Ottoman occupation. So if someone would be good to clarify what this means otherwise I wager that it be removed? Thanks. 143.238.28.94 (talk) 07:04, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, rice followed the soldiers back from Alexander III's ("the great") military foray into the Persian empire. Rice was also grown in the Nile delta, being introduced from Persia. So this statement about the Ottoman's is simply not true, and I'll remove it.HammerFilmFan (talk) 01:04, 11 November 2012 (UTC)


This was not related if Greeks knew about rice or the origin of the word, it was a sentence which stated the fact that rice spread mostly by the Ottomans in the Balkans after they conquered the region. It became a widely cultivated plant and entered the cuisine of the Balkan people. Variations of the word pirinç are used in several Balkan languages.

But I do not want to discuss with people who do original research. This was the source and sentences which were deleted.

The Ottomans introduced rice in the Balkans, it was a unknown plant in the Balkans before the Ottoman conquest.[1]DragonTiger23 (talk) 20:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

(1)Conversion to Islam in the Balkans: Kisve Bahası Petitions and Ottoman social life, 1670-1730, page 46, 2004

Arsenic

Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Rice can contain low levels of arsenic (i.e. [1], [2]), something which could be mentioned in a Health or Nutrition related section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.128.192 (talk) 01:44, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

It also seems unclear if arsenic is naturally present in rice or a result of environmental contamination, or even absorption from water from uninspected sources where arsenic is naturally present (as may happen in water wells)... 76.10.128.192 (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Surprized to see NOTHING about this in the article or the history about the arsenic issue. It's referenced in a few other articles. I will write a short blurb with good verifiable sources.TjoeC (talk) 17:58, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
Your text seems excellent and referenced, thank you very much! 76.10.128.192 (talk) 21:52, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Nutrient content of major staple foods

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Rows and columns of this table should be swapped so that that columns can be made sortable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vwalvekar (talk • contribs) 15:44, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Merge

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

SECTION Rice#Harvesting.2C_drying_and_milling, Deep water rice, Paddy field (redirect from Wet rice and Rice field) and Rice cultivation in Sri Lanka all cover the same subject, and all are incomplete without reference to alternative cultivation of dry-soil Upland rice. --Pawyilee (talk) 05:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

"Four major categories of rice"

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The section entitled 'Cultivars' states:

There are four major categories of rice worldwide: indica, japonica, aromatic and glutinous.

A USDA source is provided. How universally are these considered the four major categories? I see wikipedias in other languages citing this same USDA source. It is clear from the source that they are trade categories. They are not describing the same level of genetic differentiation. It is confusing to have this in a section entitled 'cultivars' as it seems to imply that they are cultivar groups, but according to contemporary taxonomy the two groups are indica and japonica. Aromatic rice can be indica or japonica. Glutinous rice can be indica or japonica.

If these are universally considered the four major categories for trade purposes, that should be made clear, and possibly it should be moved to a more appropriate section. Or otherwise it should be clarified how aromatic and glutinous are distinctions made within the accepted cultivar groups. Dforest (talk) 06:24, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

norwegian rice

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A good section to put types of rice, rice isnt really a side dish. In nordic and african countries its considered a main dish full of minerals. When you mix flakseed, rice, oil, crushed almonds (hazelnuts, sunflower seeds etc), onion, cut salad leaves, salt/pepper/basal and maybe stringpeas you will get a dish that is not quite indian, but not quite asian and totally vegan. Sometimes they even add fish. In the western world these foods got a bad rep because of britain but they are in fact real. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.25.193 (talk) 17:53, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Economics of rice production

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It would be good to read something about the extent of government subsidies of rice production in various countries, and their effects on price.CountMacula (talk) 17:40, 13 November 2013 (UTC) Wikipedia's wheat article says wheat is the second most produced crop after corn. This article says that rice is second after corn. I don't know which is right, but someone should fix it.

Prolonged chewing of rice to give full nutritional benefit?

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Could not find anything about this in the article currently.

I heard in a film (Empire of the Sun (film)) that rice needs to be chewed a specific number of times for full nutritional benefit. I know the film is not a reliable source, but I was wondering if anyone knew if this film was referencing some actual evidence.

In another textbook (I think it was either this, [3] or this [4] ... but can't remember and no longer have print access to them), that chewing has no effect on digestion efficiency. Hard to believe, but it was citing experiments where food was cut into rough chunks and swallowed whole, and there was no demonstrable health difference between these people and people who were chewing their food even after an extended period of this eating behavior. I forget the details, which is annoying. Also, this was taking about food generally not specifically rice.

So Q for the article's authors, should people be chewing rice for longer or not bothering at all? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.196.236.92 (talk) 21:30, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Stages

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Can an image be made of the stages and posted here? See http://www.knowledgebank.irri.org/ericeproduction/0.2._Growth_stages_of_the_rice_plant.htm 109.130.159.76 (talk) 08:05, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 January 2015

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Change Raditation to Radiation, please 78.150.29.60 (talk) 02:33, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

  Done, thanks. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 03:01, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Nutrients

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The nutrient sections compares 100g portions fresh and uncooked basis. As a result 100g of potato containing 79% water are compared with 100g of rice containing only 12% water. Obviously the rice will look much much more nutricious. However, after cooking the moisture content of rice is also about 50-60% [2], and that is the relevant comparison...it is not reasonable to expect someone to replace his 100g potato diet with 100g of uncooked rice.

I suggest to base the nutrient content on "dry basis" or "oven dry basis", i.e. the crop are all compared based on their non water composition. 182.23.53.226 (talk) 08:01, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Naming error in USDA database

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

ref : 20052, Rice, white, short-grain, raw ; http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/6574?manu=&fgcd=

Should have been named "Rice, white, short-grain, raw, enriched" as in the case of white long grain, raw rice.. There is a huge difference between enriched and non-enriched varieities in nutrients such as Iron, B9, B1, B5, B6 etc. This error has been copied all over web. Can some one please verify and inform USDA ? I noticed this error when I was comparing short vs long grain white rice.Rox Tarr (talk) 05:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Typo?

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

African rice helped Africa conquer its famine of 1203 THe list of famines does not mention a famne in the year 1203. Is this some sort of typo? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 11:19, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

It would be greatly beneficial if a list of the various rice varieties were listed on the page. White and brown rice are not by any means the only types of rice. This seems like a massive oversight — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.201.0.185 (talk) 09:37, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 10 external links on Rice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Copy and pasted information from Ricepedia

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I was working on a project for school when I looked at the information on ricepedia, it was exactly the same as this. I checked to see a citation but there wasnt one

How do you know it wasn't copied from here to there? Deli nk (talk) 21:09, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Many, many websites are "mirror" sites for Wikipedia and, of course, we all love it!  Be prosperous! Paine  00:25, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 January 2016

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please update the "Australia" section of your Rice page. Please see replacement copy and references below.

Australia Commercial rice production in Australia primarily occurs in the temperate Riverina region of south western New South Wales.

Although attempts to grow commercial rice crops in the well-watered north of Australia have been made, previous efforts were ultimately unsuccessful. The main reasons have been an inability to handle pest and disease pressures, and growing varieties not attracting sufficient returns from consumer markets.

Wild rice has long been present in Northern Australia, but is not suitable for commercial production. There has been academic interest in these varieties due to them potentially having useful breeding traits (ref: “Is Australia the home of rice? Study finds domesticated rice varieties have ancestry links to Cape York”, ABC online, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-11/wild-rice-australia-linked-to-main-varities-developed-in-asia/6764924, accessed 7/1/16).

Production in the Riverina commenced around the Yanco and Leeton area in the 1920’s as an irrigated cropping option on heavy soils unsuited to other crops. The local industry utilised japonica varieties developed in California for their growing conditions, which are similar to those found in the Riverina (ref: Lewis, Gary, “An illustrated history of the Riverina Rice Industry”, pp. 48-75, published by Ricegrowers Co-operative Ltd).

Over the following decades, rice growing was expanded across more of the Riverina, as gravity fed irrigation networks fed by Murray and Murrumbidgee River upper catchment storages provided access to affordable water, complemented by suitable soil types, high solar radiation and well suited medium grain japonica varieties.

Growing support for rice production, but difficulties with collusion between millers, led to the establishment of a grower co-operative in Leeton in 1950 (ref: Lewis, Gary, “An illustrated history of the Riverina Rice Industry”, pp. 122-130, published by Ricegrowers Co-operative Ltd). That co-operative is today the grower owned company Ricegrowers Ltd, commonly known as SunRice.

Favourable seasonal conditions and the establishment of new irrigation networks led to strong industry expansion from the 1950s to 1990s, with production outweighing domestic market demand and the industry becoming increasingly focussed on servicing export markets (ref: Ricegrowers’ Association of Australia, “About the rice industry”, http://www.rga.org.au/the-rice-industry.aspx, accessed 7/1/16).

Despite production growth, rice had established itself as a somewhat opportunistic cropping option in the Riverina, with production varying from season to season in response to varying water allocations in the Murray and Murrumbidgee irrigation regions. This production variability became most acute from 2002 to 2010 as south eastern Australia experienced severe drought conditions (ref: The Rice Marketing Board for the state of New South Wales “Statistical summary”, http://www.rmbnsw.org.au/statistical-summary, accessed 7/1/16). The drought conditions led to political reform of agricultural water management in the Murray-Darling Basin region of Australia, with the Commonwealth Government funding the shift of significant volumes of water away from agricultural production (ref: Murray Darling Basin Authority, “What’s in the Basin Plan”, http://www.mdba.gov.au/basin-plan/whats-basin-plan, accessed 7/1/16). Although drought conditions eased in 2010, these policy changes will reduce average annual rice production in the Riverina from levels experienced in the 1990s.

To alleviate policy and climate risk attached to Riverina production, the Australian industry is currently expanding production in North Queensland (ref: North Queensland Register, “SunRice goes all in on North Queensland commitment”, http://www.northqueenslandregister.com.au/story/3366661/sunrice-goes-all-in-on-nq-commitment/, 26 November 2014, accessed 7/1/16).


Ricegrowers (talk) 04:42, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

  Not done: It's pretty clear from your username and the text you've suggested that you have a conflict of interest. It's also apparent from the length of time that your request has gone unanswered that other editors are equally reluctant to implement it. Bazj (talk) 09:33, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Rice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:19, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Rice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:52, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Awkward Sentence

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In the section on Arsenic concerns, the second sentence opens with "There is no safe level of arsenic, but, as of 2012, a limit of ..." I don't understand what they mean by "no safe level." Other sources (such as Wikipedia's own arsenic poisoning page) state that there are safe levels of arsenic. I don't understand what is meant by this.Lukejodonnell (talk) 00:41, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Recombinant Oniorice

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please add data about the recombinant South Korean rice which includes onion genes for better overall attributes. The project isn't yet over. (Gojong) 07:01, 10 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.84.218.150 (talk)

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Rice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:57, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 July 2016

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

History of RICE not Flattened Rice....please!


203.111.224.82 (talk) 06:41, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — JJMC89 (T·C) 16:12, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Cultivar and variety issue needs to be solved first.....

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

See my comment at Talk:Wheat — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.38.105.161 (talk) 01:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Where is the scientific classification.....???

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please see the example of Wheat — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.38.105.161 (talk) 00:53, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

The following organizations need to be mentioned in the article......

Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

NB: GPS them before editing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.38.105.161 (talk) 01:01, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

New images

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Images for "Rice, white, long-grain, regular, unenriched, cooked without salt" and "Rice, white, long-grain, raw" are exactly the same. They should be updated to show their different qualities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.7.37.86 (talk) 01:15, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Rice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:58, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 June 2017

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Is this written by interested authors?

The part on genetically engineered rice is advertising the beneficial properties of a commercial genetically modified rice. As its only source it is citing an article [3] written by an employee of the company. This section should either be modified, sources added, or removed. QWolf (talk) 06:07, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

  Not done: You have a valid point that should be addressed, but please do not use the {{edit semi-protected}} tag unless you have a specific request to edit the article, such as "change X to Y" or "add X before/after Y". —KuyaBriBriTalk 13:44, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Conversion to Islam in the Balkans: Kisve Bahası Petitions and Ottoman social life, 1670-1730, page 46, 2004,
  2. ^ http://www.sagevfoods.com/MainPages/Rice101/Cooking.htm
  3. ^ Bethell DR, Huang J; Huang (2004). "Recombinant human lactoferrin treatment for global health issues: iron deficiency and acute diarrhea". Biometals. 17 (3): 337–42. doi:10.1023/B:BIOM.0000027714.56331.b8. PMID 15222487.

Semi-protected edit request on 24 July 2017

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
49.244.218.55 (talk) 06:22, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 08:55, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Rice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:21, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Duplicate information

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is some duplicate information in the section "History of domestication and cultivation" (e.g. first and third paragraph). Since this is a semi-protected article, I do not know what I could do about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WGodrebh (talk • contribs) 16:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Non-illustrative image

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please remove the image from Rice#Europe

ie  

This is not a good illustration of "Rice cropping" which it is captioned as. The color is completely wrong - a field of rice is not "white".

You can see images of rice cultivation in spain ie google search to see how utterly misleading this image 5.198.10.236 (talk) 14:18, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Energy units

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The large table of staple foods lists only kJ for energy. It would be nice if it included kcal.

Also, the two small tables for long and short grain rice list energy in both, but in opposite orders. The long grain rice table lists kcal first, then kJ in parentheses; the short grain rice table lists kJ first, then kcal in calories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikgervae (talk • contribs) 19:04, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Contradictory information on protein content

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The table on the right of rice's nutritional content indicates it has 2.69 grams of protein per 100 grams, but the comparative table of different staples on the same page lists rice as having 7 grams of protein per 100 grams. I think the 2.69 gram is the correct one, it should be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.46.38.5 (talk) 21:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

French Yield Incorrect

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The yield given (50.1t/ha) in France is incorrect, the original data source gives the yield in hectograms per hectare, not kilograms. The actual value is 5.01t/ha

Not entirely sure why it would be in hectograms, but it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.8.151.203 (talk) 13:38, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Arsenic concerns

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Does anyone know the specific amounts of arsenic in the various brands of US  white rice?

Mathama eg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.9.22.214 (talk) 23:14, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Nutrition Information Consistency

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The nutrition information table for long-grain rice lists energy as "130 kcal (540 kJ)", but for short-grain rice the order is reversed, as "544 kJ (130 kcal)". This is confusing at best, misleading at worst. Please change one of them so that both are in the same order. (I might also point out that the larger table above comparing other foods lists only kJ, and the numbers don't even agree; is this giving values for 100g dry or cooked?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikgervae (talk • contribs) 22:34, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Characteristics

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I think the section "Characteristics" has no reason to stay in this page. In fact characteristics of the rice plant depend on the particular species we take into consideration (e.g. Oryza sativa, O. glaberrima, O. nivara, O. rufipogon, Zizania sp., etc.). I propose to delete this section or adding more information to it. --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 23:24, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 October 2019

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

eἏΧω — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.101.39.191 (talk) 18:26, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:24, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Please add nutrition info for medium-grain rice

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I noticed there are nutrition info tables for both long and short grain rice, but not for medium grain rice. Since the article makes a point of distinguishing the three in the text, and strongly highlighting the various cultures and cuisines that use medium grain rice, it would be good to have the nutrition info for that as well.

Nikgervae (talk) 20:04, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Nutrition info per 100g is inconsistent

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There's a great big table comparing nutrition for 100g amounts of various grains and other foods, but it doesn't specify whether that's dry or cooked for the grains. The Energy (kJ) amount for rice in this table is nowhere near the amounts listed for cooked short or long grain rice, so I have to assume this big comparison table is using 100g of dry rice, and probably maize, wheat, and sorghum (listed further to the right) as well. As for whether the listing in this table is for long, short, or medium grain rice, I have no idea; I would have to do some math to figure that out because the amounts in the dedicated rice block tables are for cooked amounts.

The big comparison table also lists only kJ, whereas every food item's individual pages, including this one, have block tables giving Energy info in both kJ and kcal (although there is no consistency in ordering of the two across Wikipedia).

The nutrition into blocks for short and long grain rice are explicitly for cooked quantities, with no info for dry quantities. That would also be useful info to have, across Wikipedia for all dry/cooked foods such as cereals, pseudocereals, and pulses. (Is there a better general place to make a suggestion with such broad scope?)

Nikgervae (talk) 20:04, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 June 2020

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

need to insert a few points Aiscbn (talk) 10:23, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

​You can suggest edits here on this talk page on the form "Please change X to Y". – Thjarkur (talk) 11:26, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Please add links to the article "4.2 kiloyear event" (mentioned as the 4.2k cooling event)

Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

4.2 kiloyear event is mentioned, there is a Wikipedia article on it, but no link to that article. Add link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.92.14.190 (talk) 17:19, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I couldn't find anything in the article about 4.2 anything, much less a 4.2 kiloyear event. If you want this done, please specify where in the article this is mentioned.

you can also add a link yourself, simply by placing double brackets '[[' and ']]' around the text to be linked. This is far less work than posting a message on the talk page about it... Firejuggler86 (talk) 06:51, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Here's the article on said event, in case anyone is interested. Firejuggler86 (talk) 08:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Yangzte should be Yangtze

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It says yangzte but that is not Yangtze. Pls fix for I am not allowed to. Jeljo (talk) 11:52, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Done. David notMD (talk) 09:13, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Sugarcane is not a grain

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The lead section of the article states that "It is the grain with the third-highest worldwide production, after sugarcane and maize, according to data of FAOSTAT 2012." Sugarcane is not a grain and the reference given to FAOSTAT http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx refers to agricultural commodities, therefore I think the word "grain" should be replaced with "agricultural commodity". It might also be helpful to clarify that rice has the third-highest worldwide production in terms of quantity (rather than value). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.138.79 (talk) 23:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

I changed it to "food crop." User:Kokopelli7309 — Preceding undated comment added 19:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Short description

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hi @DocWatson42: I'd like to shorten the {{short desc}}. At present it's 70 characters long, which is above the recommended 40. At least cutting it down to "Staple grain of Oryza and Zizania species" would be 41. What would you like (and anyone else)? Invasive Spices (talk) 22:33, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Split two history sections into new article?

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

So right now the article is really hard to navigate -- anyone objection to splitting out the two history sections into a "history of rice cultivation" article? That would allow for us to use a much more concise section on history and spend more time on rice as food/rice as consumed good/agriculture etc. Sadads (talk) 14:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

  Done @Invasive Spices: Would appreciate your read/rewrite on the lead since you have been paying attention to the article longer than I have -- want to make sure we are highlighting the right things in the excerpt for the main article, Sadads (talk) 14:10, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Short Water Usage Section

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Water Usage subsection of the Environmental Impacts section of the article could stand to be expanded and clarified.

The first sentence at present reads “Rice requires slightly more water to produce than other grains”. This does not indicate whether this is the water required to produce a set amount of rice (i.e. kilograms of rice produced per liter of water) or the gross amount of water used globally in rice production. Based on the source cited for this sentence, it appears that the units are mass of crop per volume of virtual water, so the sentence should be updated to reflect this. I suggest “Rice requires slightly more virtual water to produce than an equivalent mass of other grains.”

The section does not currently explain why water usage differs. Flooded rice paddies lose more water to evaporation than grains grown in non-flooded fields, as the exposed standing water more readily evaporates than soil water. This could be reflected in the article by adding a sentence such as “Rice production’s elevated water usage is due in part to the flooded paddies used to grow it, as standing water evaporates more readily than water in soil.”[1].

This would then present a good opportunity to mention Alternate Wetting and Drying, which is a technique for reducing this exact form of water loss. I suggest adding the following sentences to the end of the section: “This water usage can be reduced through irrigation techniques such as Alternate Wetting and Drying. By allowing fields to drain naturally and reflooding them, as opposed to continuously replenishing lost volume, farmers can reduce both water usage and methane production.”

Ecrooks (talk) 22:55, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Rice Trade Patterns

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Under the “Trade” subsection, it might be useful to clarify that high domestic consumption is the reason for the low rate of international rice trade.

I propose changing the sentence: "World trade figures are very different from those for production, as less than 8% of rice produced is traded internationally." to "World trade figures are very different from those for production. As many farmers are rural subsistence farmers, the rice they produce tends to be eaten or traded locally rather than sold internationally[2]. As a result, less than 8% of rice produced is traded internationally."

Ecrooks (talk) 23:04, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Clarification of Methane Emission Section

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The section on rice methane production currently states "Methane released is caused by long-term flooding of rice fields cuts the soil off from atmospheric oxygen and causes anaerobic fermentation of organic matter in the soil."

This is a fairly sparse explanation of the process and does not explain the important mechanisms or variables. I suggest replacing this sentence with the following:

"When rice paddies are flooded, the standing water is generally shallow and still. These conditions limit the rate at which the concentration of dissolved oxygen can be replenished, leading to the eventual depletion of dissolved oxygen within the water body[3]. The sustained flooding of rice paddies creates these anaerobic conditions in the paddy soil. Methanogens thrive in these soil conditions. As these organisms break down organic matter in the soil, they produce methane, which then escapes through the water and into the atmosphere. The severity of these emissions is related to the length of time that the fields remain flooded. Regular draining of paddies can significantly reduce the amount of methane produced."


Ecrooks (talk) 23:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Smallholder Population

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In the “Production” sub section after the sentence "Rice is a major food staple and a mainstay for the rural population and their food security. It is mainly cultivated by small farmers in holdings of less than one hectare." it could be useful to add the following sentence:

"Such farmers account for nearly a quarter of all farmers [4]"

Ecrooks (talk) 23:20, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.1948.0037
  2. ^ https://ricepedia.org/rice-as-commodity/international-rice-market-trade
  3. ^ https://www.academia.edu/12684520/Methane_emission_from_rice_ecosystems_100_years_of_research_A_review
  4. ^ http://www.sustainablerice.org/Resources/

Staple crop comparison table

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please see Template_talk:Comparison_of_major_staple_foods#Fresh/dry_comparisons regarding a proposed change to the template transcluded in this article. SmartSE (talk) 12:12, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 June 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
رخ جهان نما (talk) 05:53, 15 June 2021 (UTC)


How to prepare bean pilaf is one of the most popular recipes among us Iranians. Bean pilaf is a type of pilaf that contains nutritious food. Beans contain vitamins K, A and C and can therefore be included in the daily diet. Vitamin C prevents colorectal cancer. It also provides iron and helps strengthen bones. In our Iranian diet, there are different types of pilafs and pilafs, each of which has its own attractive and pleasant taste, among which bean pilaf is one of the most popular Iranian pilafs, which also includes very nutritious foods.

  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Heart (talk) 06:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)


Greenhouse gas

Latest comment: 1 year ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Chidgk1 - is your recent addition ideally worded? I've got a couple of slight concerns. First, we're saying that it's the plant that emits most gases. Would it not be more accurate to say that its production produces more than for any other plant? I also interpret that source as indicating that this is in total, rather than per unit weight or per calorie or whatever. More people grow and eat rice than wheat, one would expect the emissions from production to be higher. We should be clear on this point (perhaps by going to the Xu et al paper that the Guardian is using as a source.) Girth Summit (blether) 12:38, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Girth Summit Yes you are right we need to be clear. Ah I thought I could only see Xu abstract but it seems the whole thing is public - taking a look and hope to cite it directly if you don't first. I doubt any more words should be added to the lead otherwise it would be undue weight, but feel free to clarify the body as my text is probably not the best.Chidgk1 (talk) 13:40, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Girth Summit Cited Xu et al and attempted to be clear - no doubt you or others can improve further. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:00, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for being so amenable. I've tweaked the wording slightly, feel free to fiddle if you think I've gone too far. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 19:17, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Just letting you know: The first paragraph of the section on "climate change" is now transcribed to greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, the second para is transcribed to effects of climate change on agriculture. More content could still be added (unless this kind of information is in another sub-article that I haven't found yet?). EMsmile (talk) 09:33, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
Shouldn't this paragraph also indicate the Greenhouse gas emission per unit weight, for fair comparison? Skimming through the paragraph quickly can make readers think that rice is only half as problematic as beef when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions.
Poore & Nemecek (2018) report 50 kgCO2eq for 100g of protein for beef. And in supplementary material, that 1kg of beef is equivalent to 200g of proteins. Which gives us 100 kgCO2eq/kg
For rice, they report 1.2 kgCO2eq for 1000 Kcal. And in supplementary material, that 1kg of rice is equivalent to 3685 kcal. Which gives us 4.4 kgCO2eq/kg.
Therefore, beef seems to emit ~23 times more greenhouse gas per unit of weight.
Poore, J., & Nemecek, T. (2018). Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science, 360(6392), 987-992. Racagnol (talk) 19:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

reflist "Liu"

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I cannot see a link for the reference to the article "Rice feeds more than half the world's population" - as far as I'm concerned, there is no such article. LeetToTheBeatMakeItRoar (talk) 10:45, 23 April 2023 (UTC)LeetToTheBeatMakeItRoar

Thanks for pointing this out. It looks like someone's attempts to tidy the cites last year resulted in the reference to "Novel Insights into Rice Innate Immunity Against Bacterial and Fungal Pathogens" being totally removed, which made everything citing it effectively meaningless. I've rescued it and put it back in. The cites using this as a reference all need to be fixed so that they are in line with all the other cites. But at least they're all listed together now where they make some sense. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:07, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SP23 - Sect 201 - Thu

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2023 and 5 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): StellaQuan441 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by StellaQuan441 (talk) 02:45, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

WP:RS removal

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello @Zefr: In your most recent article damaging edit you removed Consumer Reports, the International Rice Research Institute and Nick Talbot as non-notable sources. How do we stop you from doing this? Invasive Spices (talk) 19:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

1) The Consumer Reports source was 11 years out of date and is not a good secondary source for an article on rice constituents. A better reference for potential arsenic intake from rice in US states would be from the published review literature or the FDA, as applicable; 2) the IRRI is sourced (and linked) several times in the article, so is not needed as an external link - read WP:ELNO; 3) Talbot is listed among many authors in this 2005 report cited in the article. What purpose is served to a general reader of the rice article by linking his name individually?
This edit was justified to rid the article of your obsessive use of the [[]] keys, particularly for references and even for acronyms, as evident in many of the articles you edit. The MOS:OLINK guidelines are clear, but apparently you do not see or understand them: "A good question to ask yourself is whether reading the article you're about to link to would help someone understand the article you are linking from" and "The purpose of linking is to clarify and to provide reasonable navigation opportunities, not to emphasize a particular word. Do not link solely to draw attention to certain words or ideas, or as a mark of respect." What purpose is served to a general reader of the rice article by so much of your redlinking to publishers or locations?
WP:REDNO says: "Red links ... cannot be excessive. Editors who add excessive red links ... are expected to actively work on building those articles, or the links may be removed." I do not see you building articles for the hundreds of unnecessary redlinks you added to the rice article and many others.
Next time you feel compelled to tap [[]] while editing, remind yourself of the MOS guidelines. Zefr (talk) 00:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Rice domestication

Latest comment: 9 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

History of rice domestication to be rewritten as fossil of rice 17,000 old found at Sorori, Chungju province South Korea 14.54.196.97 (talk) 02:04, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, maybe. Other cereals were collected from the wild and cooked for many years before being domesticated and cultivated, so a single find does not necessarily change the whole story. Of course we can't add anything without a reliable source, either. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:00, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rice/Archive_3&oldid=1224970075"