Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 June 2024  
10 comments  













Talk:Olive




Page contents not supported in other languages.  









Article
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
Add topic
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
Add topic
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 
















Appearance
   

 






From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 


Former good article nomineeOlive was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 22, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed

June 2024

[edit]

@Drsruli: why are you removing Palestine and leaving the US? The very poor excuse (that's all it is) that you left in the edit summary doesn't justify either the removal or the edit warring. M.Bitton (talk) 23:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The single sentence of symbolism under USA is valid as literary symbolism. (It's especially significant, as USA did not even produce olives at all, when the allusion was implemented. It is pure symbolism.) It does not affect the balance of the article. The deleted material obviously unbalanced the article, as discussed above. Drsruli (talk) 00:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't imbalance anything and if you think it does, then a trim is better than the obliteration. M.Bitton (talk) 00:06, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, this was discussed and a consensus was arrived. You can discuss it here, if you wish. You don't seem to be addressing the concerns raised in the above discussion. Drsruli (talk) 00:09, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's pure BS since the content that you reverted has been stable for months. M.Bitton (talk) 00:10, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, it isn't. It's exactly what I said. There was a problem. It wasn't fixed. Drsruli (talk) 00:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You said nothing (about what I suggested) and you fixed nothing. M.Bitton (talk) 00:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The propaganda problem addressed in the earlier discussion was fixed by Cullen's edit on Dec 5. I'm not seeeing any unbalance; it's well known that olives are especially important in the Mediterranean region and Middle East. We're building an encyclopedia, and if there aren't sections on the cultural importance of olives in Albania or Zambia we don't solve that by eliminating sourced content but by adding the missing content. Ewulp (talk) 00:31, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The information under question is of a different character than what is under the heading of symbolism, as referenced in the rest of the section. The section is actually about literary symbolism, relevant to students, for example.
There COULD be a different section relating to specific customs regarding olives and olive trees in the countries where they are currently produced, and the information would be relevant there. Or, there could be a separate article about such customs, since if it was addressed with similar detail, then the article would be lengthy of itself.
Or, if it is only notable for that region to have such abundance of cultural significance about olives, then it could even merit its own page.

The information under question is not "symbolism" in the sense of the information contained in the the other entries. It is specific cultural significance, and it looks like political propaganda, because it is out of place. @Cullen328 Drsruli (talk) 01:13, 9 June 2024 (UTC) Drsruli (talk) 01:10, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Ancient Rome section has no references to symbolism at all. With the exception of the short United States and United Nations sections, the other sections mix symbolic, cultural, and practical significance, which is what the Palestine section does. Ewulp (talk) 01:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Olive&oldid=1228936175"

Categories: 
Former good article nominees
B-Class vital articles
Wikipedia level-4 vital articles
Wikipedia vital articles in Biology and health sciences
B-Class level-4 vital articles
Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Biology and health sciences
B-Class vital articles in Biology and health sciences
B-Class plant articles
High-importance plant articles
WikiProject Plants articles
B-Class Food and drink articles
Top-importance Food and drink articles
WikiProject Food and drink articles
B-Class Agriculture articles
High-importance Agriculture articles
WikiProject Agriculture articles
 



This page was last edited on 14 June 2024, at 00:38 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.



Privacy policy

About Wikipedia

Disclaimers

Contact Wikipedia

Code of Conduct

Developers

Statistics

Cookie statement

Mobile view



Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki