Talk:Amaranth: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:58, 29 August 2006

Same plant?

Are we saying that a plant used by the pre-contact Aztecs, the ancient Greeks and in India is the same plant? Rmhermen 13:38, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

The details elude me, but I remember this from a school geography class in '98. There have been many instances when the fossil of a species of a plant or animal have been found on many, and distant, continents. Like, exact same species. Then someone figured out that there used to be one super-continent, Pangaea, which gradually broke up into smaller mega-continents and finally just regular continents. This explains how there is a lot of commonalities between the animals and plants of different continents. So my understanding would be that there was around one (maybe a couple) species of Amaranth a long time ago, and they spread at at the time when there was no impediment of oceans etc. Then the continents broke up and as each evolved to its environment, they changed into a whole lot of slightly different species. Not sure how sound this idea is considering just how ridiculously long ago it was that the continents broke up... I'm hardly an expert. Oh, I just found a page about this here --Qirex 00:54, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

Should this be merged with Amaranthus? --DanielCD 18:01, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I would say so, yes. -- WormRunner | Talk 20:38, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be actual links with the notable species?

If these species are really notable don't they deserve their own pages? It is irritating that they all redirect you to the amaranth page. Just a thought.

It's a very bad practice to link to pages which are only, and have only ever been, redirects to the page one is already on. There is a point to having the redirect pages, but there is no point in creating links to them from the page which is the actual destination of those redirects. I'm going to remove all those links and leave it as just text. --Qirex 14:06, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The wiki is flexible. We can create articles for individual species when and if there is enough material. In the meantime, redirect here. — Pekinensis 17:25, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the first poster. It is extremely irritating that all those articles link here. It's not just because I consider it spamming/trolling/or something, it's that it discourages people from making species articles. Many times people make articles because it's their area of interest, and if someone wants to make multiple Amaranth species articles it becomes annoying. If you also link the common names, it becomes even MORE annoying. There are many common names for a single species and if someone does not know one and makes an article, the common name would still redirect here. --TheAlphaWolf 01:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i agree with alphawolf 66.171.60.45 01:16, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For kids ?

Does anybody knows how old a kid has to be to eat amaranth ? Already as baby (12 monthes) ?

EstebanLux

I'm no expert on Wikipedia, but I can tell you this: Wikipedia is not a recommended source of nutritional or medical information. Talk to your doctor. If s/he doesn't know, a nutritionist should. FunnyYetTasty 03:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's good to speak to experts, but that's no reason not to have (or seek) the information here for all to see. Doctors don't always have the answers to obscure questions at their fingertips, and well-referenced information here may be just as or more reliable.

EstebanLux - do you mean grain or leaf? See comment on leaf below. When I spent time in Indonesia, I was never aware of amaranth leaf being kept away from babies (as long as it wasn't reheated). --Singkong2005 ^talk 02:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reheating the greens

I added this:

Reheating cooked amaranth greens is often discouraged, particularly for consumption by small children, as the nitrates in the leaves can be converted to nitrites, similarly to spinach.^{[citation needed]}

I couldn't find a reference, but reheating amaranth greens (bayam) in Indonesia is widely considered to be a bad idea, apparently thanks to a government-run awareness campaign a few years back (sometime before 1998). --Singkong2005 ^talk 02:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 :I'm no expert on Wikipedia, but I can tell you this: Wikipedia is not a recommended source of nutritional or medical information. Talk to your doctor. If s/he doesn't know, a nutritionist should. [[User:FunnyYetTasty|FunnyYetTasty]] 03:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
+::Of course it's good to speak to experts, but that's no reason not to have (or seek) the information here for all to see. Doctors don't always have the answers to obscure questions at their fingertips, and well-referenced information here may be just as or more reliable.
+::EstebanLux - do you mean grain or leaf? See comment on leaf below. When I spent time in Indonesia, I was never aware of amaranth leaf being kept away from babies (as long as it wasn't reheated). --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Singkong2005|talk]]</sup></small> 02:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
+== Reheating the greens ==
+I added this:
+:<tt>Reheating cooked amaranth greens is often discouraged, particularly for consumption by small children, as the [[nitrate]]s in the leaves can be converted to [[nitrite]]s, similarly to [[spinach]].{{fact}}</tt>
+I couldn't find a reference, but reheating amaranth greens (bayam) in Indonesia is widely considered to be a bad idea, apparently thanks to a government-run awareness campaign a few years back (sometime before 1998). --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Singkong2005|talk]]</sup></small> 02:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)