Watermelon was one of the Agriculture, food and drink good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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 Date Process Result November 25, 2014 Good article nominee Listed July 7, 2019 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Plants High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Food and drink High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Food and Drink task list: To edit this page, select here Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink: Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish Participate in project-related deletion discussions. Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this. Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here. Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Allizone.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_botanical_terms#pepo is a better link for the pepo ref in para 1 of the article. linking the word pepo to an article about berries that doesn't mention pepos is not great. or maybe an expert can edit that berry article. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.28.211.38 (talk) 17:50, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jedorton is edit warring over this revert, ignoring that a systematics section has been created using the same information and the same main PNAS source. The scinews and inverse.com sources are lay summaries of the PNAS publication, which is about genomic evidence for a possible progenitor of the domesticated watermelon, not about watermelon history per se. Jedorton is also seemingly highlighting the Kordofan watermelon because it is from Sudan. The run-on, illiterate sentence under History provided in this edit is not about history, and duplicates the information under Systematics. Jedorton has been warned for WP:3RR and is reported to admin. Zefr (talk) 04:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sci-news and inverse sources contain valuable information that relate to the study, cause one of the authors of the PNAS study SS Renner is interviewed by them and gives a more in depth knowledge on the watermelon and it's history, which is useful to this article, last I checked illiterate means being unable to read and wright, why then do you want to engage with an illiterate like my self as you claim lol ( who can read and wright in three different languages BTW, English being my second) all's you've done is name call, and given no scientific based objections to my edit.user:jedorton talk 3:40 p.m. February 28, 2022

The point here - stated above and in my edit summaries - is that a) the PNAS study is not "history" - it's about genomics which reveal a possible progenitor, as now discussed under Systematics - click on the link to see the scientific basis for using that subhead. You brought this concept and source to the article, and it is now discussed under a section where it should be, and b) the scinews and inverse articles are lay summaries of the PNAS report. There is no advantage to the article by adding them. Zefr (talk) 16:10, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK then I can edit information from them out (the sci-news and inverse articles) and just go with the PNAS, even though this page is littered (and other wiki articles) with citations given by news sources, summary sources which is not against any of the stated wiki rules I am familiar with, why you have a problem with sci-news and inverse is beyond me, even though the author of the PNAS gives some of her own valuable insights in it. And most of my edit was rooted in the PNAS user:jedorton talk 4:29 p.m. (UTC) February 28, 2022

Reevaluating my Original edit, that majority of the edit was based on the PNAS study only the commentary from the article on the theory that Nubians cultivated it first was from the inverse source, again I see no reason why you have a problem with my original edit, you could have just eliminated that part, and FYI it mostly deals with history, The Genesis of the watermelon.user:jedorton talk 4:56 p.m.(UTC) February 28, 2022

The PNAS study is history because it deals with the genesis of the watermelon user:jedorton talk 5:01 p.m.(UTC) February 28, 2022

I removed any references to inverse and Sci-news articles ad just left what was left in the PNAS study by Renner user:jedorton talk 5:46 p.m.(UTC) February 28, 2022

The PNAS report is primary genomic research on a possible linkage between the wild Kordofan melon and currently cultivated watermelons. It is preliminary research speculating about a linkage. For the History section, a WP:SCIRS review would be needed to confirm such linkage as actual history. Please stop edit warring by insisting on your point of view. If/when other editors agree that this information is warranted as history, WP:CON, then it could be included. Zefr (talk) 17:56, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do other editors come to a consensus if my edit has been removed?, The PNAS study genetically links the kordofan melon to the domesticated watermelon and describes it as the likely progenitor of the latter, nothing speculative about that, you seem to be the only one in dispute with the scientific study and haven't given a viable reason for it to not be included in the history section other then an ad hominem accusing me of being bias in some sort of favor towards Sudan, so I ask you what's your viable reason to not have it included ? user:jedorton talk 6:45 p.m.(UTC) February 28, 2022

So can you and I come to a Consensus ? and have it placed back. user:jedorton talk 6:49 p.m.(UTC) February 28,2022

the PNAS journal is a reliable journal and wiki has this to say on it, Not sure what your problem is?

"according to Journal Citation Reports, the journal has a 2020 impact factor of 11.205. PNAS is the second most cited scientific journal, with more than 1.9 million cumulative citations from 2008 to 2018. In the mass media, PNAS has been described variously as "prestigious", "sedate", "renowned", and "high impact". user:jedorton talk 7:53 p.m. (UTC) February 28,2022

@Jedorton: let me try to explain. No-one disputes the status of PNAS. Nor is the credibility of the paper in question doubted. It sets out evidence as to the genetic relationship between the wild Kordofan melon and currently cultivated watermelons. This evidence is briefly summarized in the "Systematics" section of the article (which could be expanded a bit). This section is where such phylogenetic evidence belongs. What the paper does not do is to provide evidence as to the history of domestication of watermelons, which is a different matter. The genetic relatedness provides some grounds to speculate on the history, but that's all, and we don't report speculation.

Although there are some problems with it, and it needs some copy-editing, look at Banana#Historical cultivation. Yes, genetic evidence is used there, but also archaeological (phytoliths, dental calculus), cultural and written evidence. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:16, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So would it be okay if I added the hypothesis to the history section from the inverse article, One theory states that the crop may have been cultivated by the Nubian people in East Africa and then spread further north to Egypt and other regions.[1]. user:jedorton talk 6:49 p.m.(UTC) February 28,2022

I now see where my mistakes were made, at the time I wasn't aware of the systematics subsection, but for the user zefr to call me an illiterate was uncalled for.user:jedorton talk 9:15 p.m.(UTC) February 28,2022

zfer is my new edit in the history section okay with you? user:jedorton talk 12:39 (EST) March 2,2022

No - this is sufficiently discussed and sourced in the lede and under Systematics. A theory and conjecture - which the authors of the PNAS article discuss under Conclusion - are not verified as history of the watermelon (see sentences using perhaps, may, implies in the Conclusion, indicating the uncertainty of interpreting primary genomics research). Your edit under History is your own synthesis (WP:SYNTH) of concepts not described in a WP:SCIRS review, which the encyclopedia prefers as a source. There is no consensus among several editors here on the talk page agreeing to your point of view. Please move on. Zefr (talk) 06:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But wouldn't the kordofan melon have importance in the history of the domestication of the watermelon if it is it's likely origin of the domestic watermelon? and how it all began?user:jedorton talk 2:04 a.m.(EST) March 2,2022

Also what would I need to do to add that edit (or a similar one) into the history section? what we can agree on ? user:jedorton talk 2:09 a.m.(EST) March 2,2022

Wait for a review article in a reputable journal or book. Do not edit war. Stop the insistence on your viewpoint and try editing a different article. Zefr (talk) 07:22, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

        I just don't understand how the origin of a crop doesn't deal with it's history. user:jedorton talk  12:04 (EST)  March 2,2022

I think that the history section of the page could use some updating, including the following information regarding watermelons relationship to slavery and racism. Slave owners used to allow slaves to grow and sell watermelons, resulting in watermelons becoming a symbol of freedom for slaves. Slaves would also use watermelon to outsmart owners. They would put watermelons in the bottom of their baskets if they did not meet their quota of cotton for the day, so the baskets would weigh out the same. Watermelons being a symbol of freedom and cleverness was threatening to southern whites, so they made it a symbol of laziness, uncleanliness, and childishness. The information above is from the following source: Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page). https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/12/how-watermelons-became-a-racist-trope/383529/

Elliestone (talk) 18:22, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add a section, after the Description section of the page, with the following content: H2: Growing Stages: Paragraph 1. The Germination Stage: Under the soil, the watermelon seed will soften from surrounding moisture. It will then open up and roots will emerge and anchor to the soil. A thin stem with two leaves will then make its way up through the soils surface. Paragraph: 2. The Seedling Stage: Following germination, the seedling that emerges from the soil continues to develop. This stage marks the growth of the plants first set of true leaves that resemble typical watermelon plant foliage. Paragraph: 3. The Vegetative Stage: During the vegetative stage the watermelon plant puts its energy toward growing its foliage. The stage is marked by rapid growth in the development of new leaves. The growth from this stage is a foundation for the producing the watermelon fruit. Paragraph 4. The Flowering Stage: The flowering stages has begun when flowers appear between the vines and leaves of the plant. Pollination of these flowers is necessary for the plant to proceed to the fruiting stage. Paragraph 5. The Fruiting Stage: Consists of the formation and growth of the watermelon fruit. The flowers will dry up and if pollinated a watermelon will begin to form in its place. Paragraph 6. The Harvesting Stage During the final stage of a watermelons growth cycle, the fruit reaches its full size and is ready to be harvested. The stage occurs when the fruit has stopped growing and the stem near the fruit begins to brown. ^[1] FriendlyPlanter (talk) 19:30, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - as your username reveals, your own website is the source of this information. We need an independent (preferably, peer-reviewed) source; WP:RS. Zefr (talk) 19:46, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I want to add some genuine articles on this page. can I contribute on this? Davidbrownm05 (talk) 05:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can edit as long as the content is factual and supported with a WP:RS source. Zefr (talk) 05:47, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]