# Talk:Citrus

I've noticed that in this page and in Citrus production, lemon is not wikilinked although other types of citrus are.  Before I add the link, is there a particular reason for not linking lemon?  Thanks! ArglebargleIV (talk) 09:13, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Linked. Just the vicissitudes of rearranging text and removing overlinks, as ever. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:47, 18 January 2025 (UTC)
Oh, okay.  Thank you, and sorry for bothering you with this. ArglebargleIV (talk) 22:03, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

The existing map of Citrus's wild range and major cultivars, coloured so as to be readable with a pale ocean background, was reliably cited and conveyed the essential information clearly to readers. This was suddenly replaced without discussion with a quite different map of  "approximate native distribution of ancestral Citrus species", using glaringly clashing colours. This is not obviously an improvement: the removal of the single-sourced map and the matching single reliable source from the caption is unfortunate to say the least.
The map itself states that it combines data (Original Research by SYNTHESIS) from no less than 7 sources of uneven type and date (websites, databases, research papers from as far back as 1973), with the likelihood of unevenness of coverage, completeness, accuracy, and range. I presume that the map uses so many sources precisely because none of them actually cover all the "data" presented on the map. 
It is directly against core Wikipedia policy to synthesise data from multiple sources in this way. Some of the data may be wrong, misinterpreted, or out of date; different authors may have chosen to present the same facts on the ground in different ways, so the resulting map may be inconsistent. Whatever the case, it is not acceptable to present a synthesis as fact in this way. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:54, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
ZKevinTheCat