Talk:Apricot

No discussion of apricot wood?

No discussion of apricot wood? The tree's wood is widely used. ~2026-5044 (talk) 05:53, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Evidence in reliable sources? Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:54, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

I've added a sentence on duduk. ----Երևանցի ^talk 20:34, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Etymology in lead

I am of the opinion that etymology should generally be kept out of lead sections, on the grounds that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. It is also incorrect to delete cited material from the article body and insert it, with citation, into the lead. William Avery (talk) 07:38, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:48, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Except that cited material was literally originally present in the lead https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Apricot&diff=1341872195&oldid=1340791929 before Chiswick moved it to the etymology ever since someone recently decided to shift it a couple sentences up for whatever reason... this sudden issue with a simple sentence is really strange. EnglishCSMajor (talk) 08:09, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Well since there's a clear thought that it shouldn't be up in the lead, let's have it in the body only now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:43, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Not really. First you reverted with the reason being to not add “new” material as the lead is for summaries only, so I showed how there is corresponding info already in the Cultivation section. Then you say glosses/etymology aren’t important enough for the lead, but there’s literally a gloss/etymology sentence in the lead saying “Armeniaca are also called apricots”, with a citation no less. And again, this falls back to the original sentence already being present in the lead without issue until now, for whatever reason. All I did was revert your edits, none of the material I added was “new”, nor needs consensus… Cmon now. EnglishCSMajor (talk) 09:00, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Please drop the stick, you'll get nowhere with this as it shouldn't have been there in the first place. Editing on a small screen, I may have mistaken your move as being from body to lead rather than para to para, but either way, we have it right now, so let's forget all about it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:06, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Sweet vs Bitter distinction

Considering that these terms seem relevant to the toxicity of apricot kernels, it would be nice to see information that clarifies the distinction between "sweet" and "bitter," whether this refers specifically to taste or to actual varieties. Some sources claim the difference is natural plants vs. a hybrid produced by grafting, others claim that there are one of each kernel in every pit, and the Singapore Food Agency doesn't recommend eating either variety in general if they have not been cooked beyond roasting. Clearly, there's an industry distinction/standard that has produced a large market of apricot kernel products safe for consumption, but it's not evident in this article or the Apricot one what that is. ~2026-35436-58 (talk) 15:58, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

This is the Apricot article ... and the claims don't seem too reliable. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:02, 17 June 2026 (UTC)