Talk:Wheat

Phylogeny dispute tag

Yangchengu, could you please further explain your tagging of the phylogeny section as disputed? Your edit summary says "Tagging disputed section due to multiple inaccuracies: hexaploid wheat parentage (cultivated emmer, not wild emmer) and incorrect listing of Ae. squarrosa (syn. of Ae. triuncialis) as a parent (CCUU genome, not DD)". Can you please expand on that using reliable sources to back up what you're saying, and explain why you haven't just made the edits. Fences&Windows 12:54, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes, a dispute is when editors disagree, but we don't seem to have done that at all here. All we need to do is update the text from the new source(s). Since what is there is reliably sourced, the worst that can have happened is that scientists have moved on with fresh findings (happens all the time), so the current text, maybe slightly tweaked, will record a historical position unless we agree it can just be dropped. I've removed the mention of Ae. squarrosa; cited text already named Ae tauschii, and labelled emmer as bread wheat's parent. The tag does seem inappropriate. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:11, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

OWID slider removed on spurious grounds

An editor has (twice!) deleted the slider image displaying production data on the grounds that the back button is disabled in the display. Deletion simply makes the data unavailable to the reader. All that is required to exit the tool is to press the escape button; no doubt there are other workarounds, and no doubt the issue will be fixed (if there are any engineers left to do such tasks). It is absolutely not a good reason for edit-warring, and making the same deletion twice is, make no mistake, already an incipient edit-war: both that and the original deletion are wrong.

Doc James, I think you put the gadget in the article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:07, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

So, once it's fixed, we can certainly put it back. But the "back" button is basic Web functionality, and it's not acceptable to have something that it doesn't work with in an article. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:23, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

That doesn't justify your conduct; and we don't agree on removal either. Let's see what others think, and let's hope a fix is available. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:53, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Well, I will certainly agree with you that I hope it can be fixed quickly, which would render anything else moot. That said, though, we cannot leave broken stuff in an article, so until it is fixed, it will need to be removed. Hopefully the fix will be done soon, but until and unless that happens, we can't have it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:35, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

It's not "broken", it just has restricted but usable functionality, and you certainly don't have consensus for any action, so removal would be disruptive editing. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:53, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Well, I would argue that keeping in something known not to work properly is disruptive editing. It's not "restricted but usable functionality"; that might be a photo that enlarging it doesn't work on. It's fundamentally broken; the back button must work on all Web content, without exception. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:19, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

That's way beyond policy; it's basically an image sequence that folks can step through, and it works just fine for that. Anyway, let's see whether Doc James has a solution since he uses those things all the time, and if not, what other project members think. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:43, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Well, I think, yes, it's beyond policy, in that I don't think we have to have a policy saying that things should fundamentally work. I wouldn't have expected to need a policy for that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:20, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

We are working to fix this issue. And will hopefully have it ready to roll out soon.

There is still a bunch more improvements we are planning on making but will bump this to the top of the queue. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:25, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the action, and for letting us know. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:45, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Okay it is fixed on MDWiki:WPM:OWID. Have requested an update to Wikipedias. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:33, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Good work! Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:00, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

User:Seraphimblade and User:Chiswick Chap fix has now rolled out to EN WP. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:03, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Much appreciated, Doc James! Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:05, 20 July 2026 (UTC)