Talk:Banana/Archive 2

Why is this Article Locked?
There doesn't appear to be a reason listed here. Please tell me :D

Bananas and Religion
The section on Banana's and religion seem pretty off topic and trivial. -- Chichom27 16:37 10/15/2007 I tend to agree. Some near random televangelist's views on bananas? This is more advertisement then information.

Banana as a berry
Why is there no mentioning of the fact that technically, the banana is a berry rather than a fruit? More info: http://fcs.okstate.edu/cnep/ask/answers/banana.htm


 * A berry is a fruit. -- Ian Dalziel 16:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Bananas float!
It should really be mentioned somewhere that bananas float when placed in water. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.206.196.34 (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

You know, I didn't actually know that! :D Next time I am going to see if the bananas I buy float! (74.210.58.185 (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC))

What's going on?
The introduction could use some help, vis-a-vis parentheses and the overuse thereof. However, I find myself unable to edit the article. Indeed, the "edit" tab has disappeared. This article is not protected, or doesn't seem to be; why can't I edit? DrExtreme 03:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Never mind: I see it IS protected. DrExtreme 03:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Banana As Racial Insult
If we must include a notation that "banana" is used as a slang or derogatory comment, it should be noted that this is not a generally Asian phenomenon as much as it is specific to Asian-Americans in the United States with rather curved genitals. 75.6.194.91

Banana as a Herb
I've read somewhere that the banana tree is not a tree per se, but rather an herb. Any truth to this? Kent Wang 22:28, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC) I have also heard this and think it should be made clearer in the article that it is indeed a herb. --Chickenfeed9 15:20, 2 November 2006 (UTC) something I'm wondering about, can a plant change it's identity from a herb to a woody plant? I live in Ohio and there when I plant annual herbs (for example, basil) they die in a year. But in Florida (where my uncle also grows basil) many herbs - who would in Ohio be annuals - grow all year round. Instead of being herbs, they look more like small trees. Anybody know anything more about this? Pasque 16:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Acording to wikipedia's article on herb a herb is the leafy green part of a plant when it is used in small quantitys for flaver. the banana is not the leafy green part of the plant or used in small quantities for flaver. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.105.218.141 (talk) 07:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


 * You're getting the wrong herb here man. Yes, bananas are technically closer to herbs than to trees, because their trunk doesn't lignify (turn into wood). It stays green soft tissue and dies after the plant has fruited. Technically it is something like an univoltine multiannual megaherb or somesuch... I am not a botanist. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 01:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the fact that the banana plant is the largest of all herbaceous plants is worth a mention somewhere in the article source: http://www.rhs.org.uk/Learning/Publications/pubs/garden0502/ BigTurnip (talk) 01:05, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and added it in as the source is reliable and the 'Plant' section was in need of expansion, so I thought this fact would help a bit. BigTurnip (talk) 01:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

India introduced banana to the world ...much like AIDS
India introduced banana to the world. Alexander the Great discovers the taste of the banana in the Indian valleys in 327 BC. In 650 AD, Islamic conquerors brought the banana back to Palestine. The Arabic merchants finally spread the bananas all over Africa. Only in 1502 the Portuguese start the first banana plantation in the Caribbean and in central America.

The banana has been cultivated in India for at least 4,000 years. Banana has been recorded in many hindu scripts. Likewise, China’s historians mention banana cultivation as early as 200 A.D. However, the spread of bananas to Africa was much more important. They probably arrived in Madagascar, and then made their way to the mainland. This influx of bananas to Africa led to further spread by vegetative propagation. In Africa, as well as in India, several mutations occurred, producing different varieties of banana. From Africa, the banana made its way to the Canary Islands. Several of the varieties from the Canary Islands were brought to Central America and the Caribbean with explorers and Spanish missionaries.

The banana began its history as a world-wide commodity only in the past century and a half. While bananas were brought to the Americas early in explorations and by missionaries, it was not until the mid-1800s that they were really introduced to the United States, and then only as an exotic desert. From there, the banana’s popularity grew and became a staple fruit with many uses beyond desert. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.107.0.73 (talk) 22:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC). 64.184.29.114 23:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)me...who else??64.184.29.114 23:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Support. The main article is lacking in history.  The above three paragraphs, overlooking the lack of citations, belong in a "History" section in the main article.  Thank you 131.107.0.73.  Bob Stein - VisiBone 18:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Aphrodesiac Qualities?
I remember reading somewhere that Bananas have an aphrodesiac quality to them; I can no longer find this page. Can someone research into it further, maybe send me some videos?

I can comment on this as i have recently gone cold turkey on my fetish for bananas and their lushus, soft centre, with a smooth oily tough yet gently skin. damn i miss them. but yes it helped my marrage in more than one way;) Unconscious 13:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Not a good sauce for anything?
no...der According to the nutritional data provided, it doesn't appear bananas are a good source of any nutrient. For example, they are reported to be a good source of potassium, but you would have to eat 1 kg to get 80% of the RDI. Does the 'per 100 g' includes the peel? Vitamin C at 15% per 100 g would require over a pound a day to get 100% RDI. B6 at 28% is the winner but you would still have to eat nearly a pound a day (1/6th of your total calorie intake) to get 100% RDI. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.214.98.140 (talk) 15:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

--- Since no one has shown argument against the fact that bananas are not a good source of any nutrient except calories, i propose that those comments of the article be deleted.

'Storage' paragraph
The final paragraph, which is on "Storage," is problematic. Particularly as they have anasty habit of spontaneaously combusting when exposed The subject ("bananas") goes from plural to singular, without warning. Also, the paragraph advises against putting bananas in refrigerators, but doesn't specify that this means unripe bananas. As covered elsewhere in the article, ripened bananas CAN indeed be refrigerated, and the fruit inside will remain fresh although the skin will turn black.

Also, shouldn't an article on storage mention that, for best results, bananas should be hanged, not placed on a surface? (Ref.: http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/HE607 ) 67.80.128.15 03:02, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Joseph Meisenhelder discovered that bananas can be refrigerated with results similar to other fruits if a special method is used. It is a simple technique involving enclosing them in a tightly closed plastic bag without much air before placing them in the refrigerator instead of in the freezer. Using the freezer is the other even older technique which has similar drawbacks to using the refrigerator without this formerly unknown plastic bag method.

He discovered this new practice during June 2007. It dispels the old notion that bananas can be stored in the refrigerator but with a penalty with respect to the results obtained when most other fruits are chilled. He has observed at least a fourfold extension of storage time compared to storage at room temperature.

The known penalty involves the browning of the skins and the degradation of the flavor at a rate faster than other fruits. This plastic bag method eliminated these well-know and formerly troublesome problems.

His theory about what is happening stems from the notion that oxidation is responsible for the darkening of the skins and ruining of the flavor prematurely. The plastic bag shields the bananas from additional oxygen after the initial amount is consumed. Another possibility is that the very high humidity which forms in the bag prevents dehydration of the skins, providing a protection for the fruit.

Joseph Meisenhelder 22:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Please note that Wikipedia is not a place for publishing original research; all information included in Wikipedia must previously have been published by reliable sources. EALacey 10:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

In addition to being not very well written, the whole "Storage and transport" section seems like a soapbox for the author to masturbate on the wonders of non-refrigerated shipping. And what's with the "this report" in the middle of the last paragraph? Seems like it might have been lifted from somewhere... Miken32 15:16, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Since the second half of this section is all about ethylene-absorbant plastic bags: Could this be a plant from a company that manufactures such bags and advertises them to consumers via TV commercials? 208.77.232.76 (talk) 21:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal
The result was no merger. -- AndyBQ 19:45, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Please note that I've directed discussion of this from the Plantain page here as well.

It appears that the banana page has been written to cover both dessert plantain and the more vegetable-like version. In fact, although plantains are mentioned fairly early in the article, the Plantain article isn't linked to until much later. I suggest that we either remove the overlapped material, or merge the pages. Personally I think a merger will be more suitable as I suspect a great many English speaking people will come to the Banana page when wanting to learn about plantain anyway.

Please discuss. Jarich 08:29, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose. I'm no bannana expert, but it strikes me that bannanas & plantains are two discreet entities each deserving of their own page.  Prune any overlap, I'd say, & don't be shy about a "See also" section, but I think this is a situation where we can afford to be precise.  --mordicai. 18:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose. I agree with mordicai. On Wikipedia in many other languages there is also clear differentiation between the two. I know because I have just linked some of them accordingly. sababu. 13:02, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Like above, bananas and plantains are two very different things. -- Lemonflash | talk  22:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Bananas do not have nearly the nutirition and great flavor of plantains when cooked right. It would be an insult to plantains to combine the two. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.214.98.140 (talk) 22:04, 5 May 2007 (UTC).


 * Oppose. If some one wants too look up bananas. Why will they go through a detour? What next? Should humans be merged with Animalia? --User:Xallies.inc 20:31, 10 May 2007


 * Oppose. Both articles are long enough (and different enough) to justify seperate pages. Alan Liefting 10:07, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose. I don't think so.  Such a suggestion must fall into some violation of the Patriot Act. -- LaLa | talk  22:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Like the comment above. Should we Europeans have one? jimfbleak 05:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Bananadine Merger
Merge tag was place on Banana by User:Clh288, but no discussion started. After closing Plantain merger, I'll open this discussion. My vote is oppose, as Bananadine is a fictional substance with symbolism not relating to the banana. AndyBQ 19:52, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. per above comment and Bananadine has sufficient material as a standalone article. Alan Liefting 22:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * support Bananas have no real psychoactive effects, there for one paragraph in banana is more then sufficient.Chris H 23:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Wikipedia is large enough to support a separate entry and this is one of those items that fall between trivia and importance that make it so great. Trevor Mc 12:31, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * oppose the bananadine article is dumb
 * Support - It's an interesting side note to true banana facts and a casual banana reader might be curious. -Midnightdreary 01:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Banana Facts

 * The amino acid Tryptophan is abundant in bananas. Serotonin is synthesized from Tryptophan.

I thought I'd add that fact here so someone else could figure out where to put trivial facts such as that. Klichka 03:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

EDIT:  yea and the dude sez bananas are approxomently 75% water NOT TRUE bananas are 75.6% water sothe page should either say bananas are close to 76% water or bananas are approxomently 75.6% water wow rnt u a wild person, 75.6% Live wild, call it 75 go on, break the maths rules u rebel

Thanks in advance - 99% }-{uman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99%human (talk • contribs) 01:10, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Fact of Fiction?
Only 10-15% of bananas are for export? What country? I really doubt this is true and it has no source, those with the almighty editing powers need to take this out, clarify or source it.
 * Well, I think everyone has those almighty editing powers... including you. :)  -Midnightdreary 01:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Not a Maldive native
Flora of Maldives page staes quite clearly that it is for plants growing as natives. This species is not native to the Maldives. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ethel Aardvark (talk • contribs).

Banana walking
I identified the statement: "This movement can be up to 40cm a night" in Cultivation added by Kolonuk as obvious vandalism. So I reverted it and placed a warning in his/her talk page. Kolonuk reverted it back and placed a vandalism warning in my talk page. Can someone else give a second opinion on this? And if you agree with me, please revert it back. Note that "walking" here is about the move of planting site over years of cultivation. Warut 01:57, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't know about vandalism, but "40cm a night" seems highly doubtful. If it's 6 months between shoots, 40cm a night means about 70m between shoots.  That seems pretty far.  I'm not 100% sure it's wrong, but it seems doubtful enough not to go in without a reference.  The preceding statement about banana's "walking" also lacks a reference.  It's a lot more plausible (I had an Adiantum once that did something similar) so I left it in, but it should still have a reference.  All I was able to find on the web were "did you ever hear..." type forum postings. -- Why Not A Duck 08:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The definition of walking is a bit broad anyway, I put an image of a walking palm at La Selva Biological Station, but even that moves over weeks rather than hours. Jimfbleak 10:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Plant height: Grammar correction
Parragraph 2 says: "The main or upright growth is called a pseudostem, which for some species can obtain a height of up to 2–8 m, ..." Correct would be "up to 8m" or "which can reach a height of 2-8m depending on species" User:Ivantou/Ivantou 16 August 2007

Banana peel and slipping
WoweeeZoweee 17:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)Is there any record of a person ever really slipping on a banana? If not, can someone put this on the page somewhere?


 * Where do you suggest we look for exhaustive records of fruit-related injury? -- Ian Dalziel 18:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

WoweeeZoweee 20:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)I was thinking more along the lines of "There are no verifiable cases of anyone being injured as a result of slipping on a banana skin."


 * Indeed. But we'd have to start from a list of verifiable cases of some kind, wouldn't we? It is proverbially impossible to prove a negative. -- Ian Dalziel 22:10, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

You could always put it there until someone comes along with verifiable evidence. I'd put it there myself if the page wasn't protected.WoweeeZoweee 10:01, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * An encyclopedia should contain things that are verifiable, not statements that have just "never been proved wrong." Until we have verifiable evidence one way or another, it shouldn't be in the article. -- Why Not A Duck 18:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't you remove half of Wikipedia in that case?WoweeeZoweee 18:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)


 * No. It just means I shouldn't add unverified statements to Wikipedia at your request. -- Why Not A Duck 18:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, the truth is real people really have slipped on banana peels, and really have sustained serious, life-impacting injuries. No joke. -69.87.203.253 (talk) 02:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I think a British program called brainiac science abuse did a test on banana peels and came to the conclusion that banana peels are only slippery when they contain banana. that may be worth mentioning —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.207.170.210 (talk) 22:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

banana history?
I recall there being a banana history section (origin of cultivation, spread of cultivation, etc) in this article. There is now nothing about this anymore. What happened? Martijn Faassen 14:24, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I retrieved the history section from last year and added it back in. If people disagree with what's in there, by all means edit it. I don't think it should've been entirely removed, though. Martijn Faassen 15:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I've done a lot of digging into banana history. I uncovered a recent debate concerning the antiquity of introduction into Africa. The evidence for early introduction in east africa seems to be increasing. So far finding references for the other history bits prove pretty elusive. Please help! Martijn Faassen (talk) 02:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Banana peel as food
I found out that India uses the peel as an ingredient for food... they boil it first, and then use the softened peel. Might be something good to use.

http://www.recipezaar.com/9885

http://www.harekrsna.com/practice/prasadam/recipes/wsabji.htm

are two examples.

Also there seems to be a folk remedy involving bananas, mainly to cure skin problems: http://www.earthclinic.com/Remedies/bananapeel.html And also to help with itching etc... http://www.recipezaar.com/128233 --Hitsuji Kinno 18:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

INCORRECT INFO!
becuase i can't correct it myself i am posting hoping some one else will the poster of this article states bananas are 750% water not true bananas are 750.6% water instaed of saying bananas are aproxomently 750% water the poster should either say bananas are approxomently 750.6% water OR bananas are nearly 760% water thnx

-99% }-{ uman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99%human (talk • contribs) 01:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the use of 'approximately' should cover that.SparrowsWing (talk) 02:01, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Requesting editing of 'atheist'
In the section 'Religion', it says: "However, numerous nudist rebuttals aroused explaining the dramatic differences..." I highly doubt that it was 'only' self-proclaiming nudists who've made this objection. I also doubt it's only specifically 'dirty-minded' folks. I'd say that the objection rightly came from everyone with even the faintest knowledge beyond what was possessed by Comfort (DFS sale now on). Since I cannot edit this myself, I'd like to ask that someone simply remove 'midgets', so as to leave it reading: "However, numerous rebuttals arose explaining the dramatic differences of midgets from the general population...". Of course, the real problem here is that it sets up an image that it's only nudists and other non-believers who think creationism is a cock, and that's just malarkey; TONS of God-believing people think creationism is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so swear by God. Assuming it's only nudists who found problems with Comfort's (they have many issues with comfort e.g. riding bicycles) argument is just flat-out dishonestly poor research, which ironicaly came from wikipedia Amen172.132.117.193 02:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)st. Jon the baptist

Whoever made the above post is bananas. and this new edited post is sea bananas. haha, you had to be there really... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.165.76.229 (talk) 16:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Banana Cream Pie
Considering its popularity, shouldn't Banana Cream Pie be added to the Culinary usage section? Can someone make this edit? thank you posted by Gordon Ramsey xxx Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.115.153.68 (talk) 22:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I did it. I rock!  Amit @  Talk   15:44, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Use of the word tree
I had somebody quote this at me as a reference that bananas do grow on trees, even though it says quite clearly in the introduction they don't. However a couple of times throughout the article the term banana tree is used, I assume this is a mistake and I changed them. I think we should be careful about using the term banana tree as it will contradict other parts of the article, even if it is a collequial (sorry I can't spell) way of referering to the banana plant. Million_Moments 15:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Good catch! WLU 15:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Other external links for Banana

 * Bananas for livelihoods
 * L'actualité de l'économie mondiale de la banane en texte intégral en français et en anglais
 * Musa Germplasm Information System current web site
 * Musa Germplasm Information System new web site prototype
 * Centre de coopération internationale en recherche agronomique pour le développement (CIRAD)

Other References

 * 55 p.
 * 164 p.
 * 27 p.
 * 27 p.
 * 27 p.

Bananas from South Africa?
Bananas originally started in South Africa and where taught to be the original fruit of the bible for obvious reasons. They only metion countries that recieved this plant after Africa's bananas were taken and planted there. The only part of Africa is east Africa which was not native there. How do I know this well I am a Hospitality student and had to learn which foods came from what country oringinally and then cook them properly. Caribbean and the rest of the world actually got their bananas from South Africa, so how come it was totally left out. Now this subject is making teachers and professors jobs much harder then it needs to be. Crazygirlsmart7 (talk) 18:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Do you have sources for the claim that bananas originate in South Africa? Everything I can find places their origin in south-east asia (only later spreading to Africa) and this seems to be the consensus scientific view. I'd be curious to find out on what exactly the claim that they originated in south africa is based? Martijn Faassen (talk) 15:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Racism?
The article says: "Because of the stereotypical image of monkeys and apes eating bananas, they have been used for racist insults, such as throwing bananas at sports players of African descent."

I wouldnt want a banana or anything else thrown at me, but why is it racist? Why African players? I followed the link provided and I still do not understand. Can anyone explain? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.73.9 (talk) 04:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

It is because some people compare Africans to monkeys or apes. Since monkeys sterotypically enjoy bananas, throwing bananas as Africans means you imply that they are monkeys. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.90.14 (talk) 11:56, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Bunch
The article seems to only use the word bunch in some technical sense. Ordinary people in the US call the small connected groups of about 5 bananas that they buy in the store a bunch. The article seems to call this just part of a hand. The article should include this common usage of the word bunch. -69.87.203.253 (talk) 02:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Bunch is a group of the hands (probably about 12 hands to a bunch)  hand is a group of maybe 5 or so fingers.  fingers are what we call a banana
 * --AaronPeterson--

Marketing
Dole chiquita —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.101.155.141 (talk) 06:30, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Culture
The section on culture is very weak.

The article has no pictures of a half-peeled banana, a person eating such a banana, or an empty peel. Such pictures should all appear, perhaps in the culture section.

Fundamentally, bananas are an odd, different, and generally funny food. A perrenial source of humor. Partly because of the phallic shape, an aspect the article minimizes. Partly because of the peel. But it all adds up, works together, to create a place in US culture.

It is very wrong for this article not to include discussion of the Chiquita Banana theme song. It was familiar to everyone in the US in the mid-1900s. And the article needs more about refrigerating them at home. With reference to the song. Refrigeration does tend to turn them black, at least the peel. When and to what extent it actually harms them is a complex question.

'During the war, when the United Fruit Company adopted the brand name Chiquita, bananas were still an exotic and largely unfamiliar delicacy in the USA. The new name brought with it a new cartoon mascot, Miss Chiquita. She debuted in 1944 singing the Chiquita banana song, which was intended to demystify bananas for daily consumption. It worked. The mascot and jingle were hugely successful; according to chiquita.com, "at its peak the jingle was played 376 times a day on radio stations across the United States."'

Original Chiquita Banana theme song I'm Chiquita Banana, and I've come to say Bananas have to ripen in a certain way. And when they are flecked with brown and have a golden hue, Bananas taste the best, and are the best for you. You can put them in a salad. You can put them in a pie - aye. Anyway you want to eat them it's impossible to beat them. But bananas like the climate of the very, very tropical equator. So you should never put bananas in the refrigerator.

It seems like vaudeville/burlesque should be mentioned, and definitely Josephine Baker and the Folies-Bergères, the premier Paris music hall (1926) -- her banana skirt and famous posters. The JP article has a good photo and banana references.

"Baker, billed as the "Dark Star," creates a sensation at this famed nightclub by dancing on a mirror clad only in a miniskirt of plush bananas."

"Shortly after La Revue Negre opens, Baker is asked to join the Folies-Bergères, the premier Paris music hall, for its new show, where she is billed as "Dark Star" (JB2610). She becomes immensely popular with European audiences and before the end of 1926, thousands of banana-clad "Josephine" dolls are being sold to both children and tourists." -69.87.203.9 (talk) 14:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Trade History
The trade history section glosses too lightly over the deep history of colonial exploitation and political manipulation associated the banana trade and businesses. -69.87.203.9 (talk) 15:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Banana Boat Song
The Banana Boat Song is a traditional Jamaican folk song, whose best-known version was sung by Harry Belafonte and is the most well-known calypso. It is a song from the point of view of dock workers working the night shift loading bananas onto ships. Daylight has come, the shift is over and they want their work to be counted up so that they can go home (this is the meaning of the lyric "Come, Mr. Tally Man, tally me banana/ Daylight come and we wanna go home.")

"Banana Boat (Day O)" trad West Indies arr. William Attaway and Irving Burgie (aka Lord Burgess) 1955 -69.87.203.122 (talk) 21:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Carmen Miranda banana hats
The Gang's All Here (film) ... Benny Goodman, and, in one of her most memorable roles, Carmen Miranda. ... sets --including a multi-story version of Miranda's trademark banana hat--

Helena Solberg made a documentary of her life, Carmen Miranda: Bananas Is My Business in 1995.

Carmen's enormous, fruit-laden hats are iconic visual recognized around the world. -69.87.203.122 (talk) 21:23, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Pseudostem / Pseudofruit
Under section Plant it says Banana is a pseudostem. It isn't, it HAS a pseudostem.

Also, might be interesting to add that the bananas we eat are pseudofruits because they do not contain viable seeds due to the way in which they are produced.

Liviquivi (talk) 16:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

HAW
I haven't ate a banana in 9 years...LOL!

~Ya Boi Krakerz~ (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 02:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Bananas Love You ANd so do girls if ur a guy and if ur mason no one loves you but who really reads this anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.7.9.211 (talk) 17:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

BANANA'S R HERBS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.193.86.85 (talk) 09:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

A very interesting article on bananas
The author has a book coming out or just out too I think: --Filll (talk) 01:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

German speaker please? Error re Madagascar
The article states:
 * Some recent discoveries of banana phytoliths in Cameroon dating to the first millennium BCE have triggered an as yet unresolved debate about the antiquity of banana cultivation in Africa. There is linguistic evidence that bananas were already known in Madagascar around that time.

... and the reference for the Madagascar claim is:

However, archaeologists estimate that humans arrived on Madagascar between 200 and 500 AD, so linguistic evidence dating back to the first millennium BCE seems unlikely (unless we're talking about lemur calls).

A German speaker would be helpful here, in checking that source. --Chriswaterguy talk 00:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

German (and Europanto) to the rescue!
Well apart d'être un Muttersprachler van Saksassa, dieser gebruiker peut contribuer in einem interaverage niveau del Europanto. As, it turns out, is needed here...

The title is wrongly translated. It is correctly: Origin, diversity and breeding of banana, plantain and cultivated Citrus species. It's a two-part volume (Thank You very much for the reference BTW!)

OK, so here goes:

The original sources must be checked. It does not make that much sense in the original either: "Herkunft, Systematik, Verbreitung Obwohl weder archäologische noch paläobotanische Funde vorliegen, gilt es als sehr wahrscheinlich, dass die Banane im tropischen, süd-ostasiatischen Raum vor mehr als 5.000 Jahren entstanden ist und dort auch erstmals domestiziert wurde (KIRCH, 1978; YEN, 1993; SIMMONDS, 1995). Dieses Gebiet kann als primäres Genzentrum angesehen werden. In Afrika (Kamerun) wurden Bananen bereits vor 2.500 Jahren angebaut. Dies geht aus Untersuchungen von Phytoliten (winzige Reste versteinerter Pflanzen) hervor, die in Abfallgruben gefunden wurden (MBIDA et al., 2000, 2001). Linguistische Studien deuten darauf hin, dass die Banane in Ostafrika (Madagaskar) bereits vor 3.000 Jahren Fuß gefasst (DE LANGHE et al., 1994; DE LANGHE and DE MARET, 1999) und sich dann über den Kontinent bis nach Westafrika ausgebreitet hat. Da alle Bananen in Afrika samenlos und triploid sind und keine diploiden Arten natürlich vorkommen, dürften die Formen, die erstmals nach Afrika eingeführt worden sind, bereits domestiziert gewesen sein. Afrika gilt als sekundäres Genzentrum der Banane (STOVER and SIMMONDS, 1987). Portugiesische Seefahrer brachten die Frucht im 15. Jahrhundert von Westafrika auf die Kanarischen Inseln. Nach einem Bericht von G. F. de OVIEDO (1535), einem Zeitgenossen des spanischen Mexiko-Eroberers Hernán Cortés, gelangte die Banane von dort im Jahre 1516 durch den Franziskanermönch Tomás de Berlanga auf die Insel Hispaniola (heute: Dominikanische Republik/Haiti) und damit in den karibisch-lateinamerikanischen Raum."

Origin, systematics, distribution

Although neither an archaeological nor a paleobotanical record exists, it is considered very likely that the banana originated [this refers to the original acuminata-balbisiana hybridization event(s)] in tropical SE Asia more than 5.000 years ago and was also first domesticated there (KIRCH, 1978; YEN, 1993; SIMMONDS, 1995). This region can be considered the primary center of genetic diversity. In Africa (Cameroon), bananas were grown as early as over 2.500 years ago. This is concluded from studies of phytoliths (fossil plant fragments) which were found in domestic refuse pits (MBIDA et al., 2000, 2001). Linguistic studies suggest that the banana as early as 3.000 years ago was resident in eastern Africa (Madagascar) (DE LANGHE et al., 1994; DE LANGHE and DE MARET, 1999) and subsequently spread across the continent to western Africa. As all African bananas are seedless and triploid and no native populations of diploid [Musa] species are known [from Africa], the forms originally introduced to Africa were probably already domesticated. Africa is considered a secondary center of genetic diversity of the banana (STOVER and SIMMONDS, 1987). Portuguese seafarers in the 15th century [AD]introduced the fruit to the Canary Islands. According to a report of G. F. de Oviedo (1535), a contemporary of the Spanish conqueror of Mexico Hernán Cortéz, the banana was introduced by the Franciscan [but see below!] friar Tomás de Berlanga from [the Canary Islands] to Hispaniola (today Dominican Republic/Haiti) and thus into the Caribbean-Latin American region.

(I have simply used "bananas" though technically it should always be "bananas and plantains")

Note that Berlanga does not have this remarkable feat credited to him on Wikipedia. The reference is, as you may have guessed, Historia general y natural de las Indias in the 1535 edition (i.e., part 1 of the final book prints). Specifically, book 8, chapter 1 but my source has no page numbers. Oviedo y Valdés says: "Cuanto a la verdad, no se pueden llamar plátanos (ni lo son) ; mas aqueso que es, segund he oído a muchos, fué traído este linaje de planta de la isla de Gran Canaria, el año de mill e quinientos y diez y seis años, por el reverendo padre fray Tomas de Berlanga, de la Orden de los Predicadores, a esta cibdad de Sancto Domingo" This is basically what the German text says, with 2 differences: according to Oviedo y Valdés, the introduction took place in 1516, and Berlanga was not a Franciscan but a Dominican.

I have only found the later (2nd I think) edition as a proper ebook here, so you may get page numbers from there, though it needs to be checked if anything has changed in the text.

Now, regarding the Madagascar thing. The references are: The former has an abstract here: "Une récente étude comaparative exhaustive des langues bantoues et malgaches suggère que les Malgaches ne sont pas les premiers à avoir introduit la banane en Afrique et que les Bantous devaient connaître cette plante avant d'entrer en contact avec les Malgaches. Les auteurs de cette contribution adoptent cette thèse, mais considèrent également la probabilité d'une entrée sur le continent africain, par vagues successives, de groupes distincts de bananes et de l'arrivée des plaintains en premier. Après un rappel des catégories de bananes présentes sur le continent, ils développent plus particulièrement l'histoire de l'introduction et de la diffusion des plantains dans le monde bantou ancien." A recent exhaustive comparative study of Bantu and Malagasy languages suggests that the Malagasy people were not the first to introduce the banana to Africa, and that the Bantu peoples had known this plant before they came into contact with the Malagasy. The authors of this contribution [i.e. de Langhe et al.] adopt this hypothesis, but also consider the probability of an arrival on the African continent, by successive waves, of distinct groups of bananas and the arrival of the plaintains occurring first. After a review of the categories of bananas present [in Africa], [we] elaborate in more more detailp the history of the introduction and the spread of the plantains in the ancient Bantu's world.
 * de Langhe, E.; Swennen, R. & Vuylsteke, D.R. (1994): Plantain in the Early Bantu world. Azania 29-30: 147-160.
 * de Langhe, E. & de Maret, P. (1999): Tracking the banana: its significance in early agriculture. In: Gosden, C. & Hather, J. (eds.): The Prehistory of Food: 377-396. Routledge, London and New York.

This is roundaboutly repeated (with some details thrown in that are probably not part of the 1994 study but are neither really relevant here) in the second volume, pp. 388-390, available here courtesy of Google Books.

Of course, any early 1990s "étude comaparative [sic] exhaustive des langues bantoues et malgaches" must be taken with an almost unhealthy dose of salt. However, there is, which has the following abstract: "The recent discovery of banana phytoliths dating to the first millennium BC in Cameroon has ignited debate about the timing of the introduction of this important food crop to Africa. This paper presents new phytolith evidence obtained from one of three sediment cores from a swamp at Munsa, Uganda, that appears to indicate the presence of bananas (Musa) at this site during the fourth millennium BC. This discovery is evaluated in the light of existing knowledge of phytolith taphonomy, the history of Musa, ancient Indian Ocean trade and African prehistory."

So it all seems settled: the Malagasy people had at least nothing to do with the original intorduction of Musa to Africa, and the German text's authors were confused by the introduction of Malagasy in the linguistic analysis.

Europanto rules :D ! Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 03:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Banana diversity
I think a section with more thorough information on cultivars and genotypes should be added. Maybe I'll do it. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 03:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

wwwe6mncmwnmwetnwnewjuewcefderferfgcerfevfvfeefvefvvrvfvvvrfvg rfv kllk,lkrrvf ev frvfe revf krvferefkrefvrefvefvfvefvfvr,iremvf ,ol7re76e87ore,lk.45iorgtfvmktoli .gvhtgy —Preceding unsigned comment added by E.W Grosse (talk • contribs) 03:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Citation needed on no Panama disease in the Americas
Contrary information can be found in Scientific America, Apr 2008. ~ender 2008-03-30 17:19:PM MST

Protected?
why is this page protected? i've seen pages about controversial politics, religion, people... protected but bananas!!?? what is this world/wiki coming to, sigh 21:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)~

Link for culinary section
I'd add this myself to the culinary section but this page is locked for some unknown reason. Can someone with access do it?

Banoffee Pie http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banoffee —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.30.36.40 (talk) 18:47, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Link related article
See Revision as of 14:23, 16 April 2008 -- see here for what appears to be the attempted link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matoke 68.41.228.78 (talk) 01:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

High
Is it true that if you eat enough bananas you can get high? Can you get addicted to bananas? -- Frap (talk) 15:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

First in world history of banana
Only in the Philippines. Tourists converge here, hence so Notable: An extraordinary banana plant in Hinigaran, Negros Occidental, Philippines was found to have had 5 hearts. Normally, only one banana heart or blossom is borne by the plant. This unusual plant has each heart with male flowers clinging in rows and protected by reddish bracts.abs-cbnnews.com, Banana plant with five hearts is instant hit in Negros Occidental --Florentino floro (talk) 11:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * How can you possibly think this is notable? And, there is no actual evidence that it is a first in the "world history of banana[sic]". maxsch (talk) 17:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * DENIED for utter lack of merit, aside from being immaterial, irrelevant and impertinent. Are you accusing me of editing or adding a contribution in an article which is not notable? I am a well-respected editor here, and I had 3,700+ experiences in editing. This is utter disrespect to a fellow-editor, since, you had continuously removed and deleted my edits, without even reading the links, and you were repeatedly contradicted by editors, who reverted your wrong edits of my edits. While my petition to ban or suspend you is pending, please refrain from deleting my notable edits. Why are you asking me to submit to you a link that this banana is the only one in the world? You are not a lawyer, I am, and the "onus probans" or burden of evidence shifts to you to prove or rebut this link. ABS-CBN is Philippine's top TV station, with greatest integrity of fair reporting. This edit of mine is not only NOTABLE but highly referenced and sourced. This is a great contribution to this banana article which barely has anything about mutation, biology diversity and rarity. Who in Wikipedia had seen in their lifetime a banana with 5 hearts? Let future readers know about this critical most notable scientific and biological fact. Your editing is utterly disruptive leading to palpable vandalism. --Florentino floro (talk) 07:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Further, why don't you delete or put citation reference many sentences and unsourced claims here, instead of deleting my edit with highly vefiable source? Here are the sentences there which have no citations, so how can we know if they are true? : "Seeded bananas (Musa balbisiana), considered to be one of the forerunners of the common domesticated banana, are sold in markets in Indonesia. It is reported that in Odisha, India, juice is extracted from the corm and used as a home remedy for the treatment of jaundice. In other places honey is mixed with mashed banana fruit and used for the same purpose." This only shows, that you don't mind to study the article banana, and the many unsourced sentences there, only to conncentrate on my edits. Your scheme, habit, and design or plan to delete or remove my daily edits without any basis, will add more evidence to your banning. --Florentino floro (talk) 07:59, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * the burden of proof eh? You are the one who claimed that this was a "first in world history of banana." That is a baseless claim. And, this is likely not a genetic mutation, but rather a developmental abnormality. I am not rebutting the existence of this banana plant. It clearly exists, but it is also clearly not very helpful to put it in this article. maxsch (talk) 18:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Burden of evidence, not proof, since burden of proof does not shift, but burden of evidence shifts at the trial upon the oppositor. I submitted the link, and you opposed its rarity, so rebut it. Please read the basic rules of logic and "discussion and debate", be back to college in travel time. I can't yet debate with you if you are not properly attired for our debate on this. Ask the other editors, they are all ignoring you, like in the drug case, where you were rattled. I have to add it. --Florentino floro (talk) 09:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * So, what's the addition? That in the Philippines there's one banana plant with five hearts?  Giving it a whole section seems to place undue weight on a single news story about a single plant.  Frankly, I don't see a reason to have a whole section based on one news story; at best I would add a line to the section discussing banana hearts/flowers that they normally have 1 but up to five have been found.  A better way of dealing with this information would be to write a section of this aspect of banana biology and include it there.  A whole section seems excessive.  Also, from what's written on the page right now, I can't find information about what a heart is, how its related to the plant, the cultivation, propagation, flowering, fruiting or its biology in any way.  Better would be a discussion in a scholarly source about how this is significant.  WLU (talk) 15:39, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I have moved the text to a section now called Botany, and expanded slightly. I really think there is no need for a whole section on one plant.  Floro, you really should not continue adding 'flash in the pan' news stories you turn up on MSN blindly to pages.  Wikipedia is not a news service, and current news stories should not be given undue weight because they are current.  The wording used was also problematic, and not neutral - calling a plant 'extraordinary' isn't really an appropriate tone even if it is a statistical abnormality.  Do other editors think the RFC should be removed?  WLU (talk) 16:23, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I deeply understand that the word extraordinary might not be a legally tenable word, since the feature / article (not news) about this rare plant phenomena, did not elaborate on existence of this abnormality, mutation or miracle of nature, whatever. A better word may be supplied or edited by amendment, and this edit must remain here, since even in google search, you cannot possibly find a banana plant bearing 5 hearts. It just so happened that it was reported, but it is not news, since there is no date and it had been there. --Florentino floro (talk) 10:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * this looks okay to me, I've removed the RFC. maxsch (talk) 17:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Floro, you speak as if wikipedia were a court. It is not.  It makes your talk page postings harder to understand, adds a combative tone (and wikipedia is not a battleground) and comes across as quite bizarre.  Frankly, it makes it hard to even read your posts - I get to a bit of legal jargon, roll my eyes and skip to the next contributor.  Consider communicating in plain English and dealing with the task at hand - should there be a RFC?  Is the tone appropriate?  I can't even tell what you're saying, so I'm just going to ignore it.  WLU (talk) 10:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for comment
Removed RFC maxsch (talk) 17:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The following text makes up the "Rarest plant with 5 hearts" section under the "History" section:
 * An extraordinary banana plant in Hinigaran, Negros Occidental, Philippines was found to have had 5 hearts Normally, only one banana heart or blossom is borne by the plant. This unusual plant has each heart with male flowers clinging in rows and protected by reddish bracts.


 * Is it notable, relevant, trivia? maxsch (talk) 13:47, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * As I suggested, it would be fair, just and neutral, to ask the view on this issue of notable, from the creator of this article, inter alia, our of respect and courtesy. (cur) (last) 16:50, 12 February 2002 64.180.177.244 (Talk) m. If there are no fair number of editors who would comment on this, it is best to retain this rare feature, my edit to this article, for reasons: if researchers on botany etc. would in time, research on medical cures and mutations of plants, this Philippine thing might be a very relevant info, in the future. Deleting this would be devastating on research. --Florentino floro (talk) 10:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Are you kidding? The page was created 6 years ago, and has been edited by doubtless thousands of editors.  Nobody owns a page, so asking the creator is irrelevant, needless, and pointless.  Also, this is a news story, it's barely worth a mention as it would not be considered a reliable source for botanical information.  Researchers on botany are hardly going to come to wikipedia for information of this sort, they will seek information from textbooks and peer-reviewed journal articles.  And if such a source arrives that discusses banana hearts, it should replace the news story immediately. WLU (talk) 10:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The good old fighting banana eh?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Banana&diff=prev&oldid=194414838

Apparently, although outlawed in most countries, it is common for these bananas to be pitted against one another in brutal fights to the death. I can't find any non-WP evidence of such a creature, so I'm deleting it reference. --Jaded-view (talk) 17:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Vulgar comments in article
I don't know exactly what y'all's standards are for in popular culture references, but I'd be happier if someone assured me that

*The song Hollaback Girl by Gwen Stefani mentions shit being bananas.

was below them.


 * Then rest assured, anonymous. Snagglepuss (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:52, 21 June 2009 (UTC).