Talk:Walnut oil

message: This is obviously written from an opinionated standpoint rather than a factual one.  It certainly needs a lot of work.
____________________________
Agreed. I don't know or have sources to clarify, but there seems to be a pretty big discrepancy in the last few sentences: the oil can be problematic due to rancidity for painting, but is okay for treating kitchenware because of low rancidity. Obviously these two statements can both be true, but for them to make any sense we need at least a qualitative comparison to something other than linseed oil (like if walnut oil is less rancid than another common kitchenware-treating oil for example) or something. Didn't edit because the information is useful but the article's quality is poor anyway.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.84.142 (talk) 08:20, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite right Capi, there are places where it's just bizarre to leave out all opinion - which is doubtless one reason why Everything2's entry on walnut oil is obviously vastly superior to what we have here. Still: This is Wikipedia, the site where you come when you want content squeezed of all opinion and original thought, and that's the way it works - and, actually, for many things it works better than one might imagine. It just means Wikipedia is not the place to come for anything which calls for the least bit of passion - except for the arguments in the Talk pages, which are arguably among the finest on the Web! --Oolong 12:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs a lot of work.  Self-contradicts on rancidity 

message: May need a mention that food use can cause anaphylactic shock in a few sensitive people. 86.158.25.77 (talk) 14:41, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caution? 

message: Because of the pictures and copy, overall the article was an advertisement for "Trader Joe's" brand roasted California Walnut Oil.  
Here is the removed image of the branded can, conveying no information other than olive oil was allegedly inside:
Ocdncntx (talk) 01:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks to the kind individual who generously provided a picture of the oil.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocdnctx (talk • contribs) 18:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ad copy 

message: Information that oils in walnut oil include a blend of 67 percent polyunsaturated, 24 percent monounsaturated and 9 percent saturated fatty acids was found online.  That's roughly right, but not exactly right, should be fact checked and accurate information added to the article, with cited source.  
The high polyunsaturated content (including significant omega 3 oils) causes low smoke point, which is why it is not preferred for high-heat applications; but rather for cooler food preparation, such as salads. 
Ocdncntx (talk) 01:42, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Walnut oil is a blend of 67 percent polyunsaturated, 24 percent monounsaturated and 9 percent saturated fatty acids 

message: Walnut oil is made and used in the Gilgit Baltistan Province of Pakistan. It is used in local dishes the fact that the walnuts are sometimes referred to as Persian Walnuts and that English never commercially produced Walnuts may indicate that other areas that were considered Persia in the past may have local production and use.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.32.197.197 (talk) 06:14, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of English Walnuts - Persia 

message: The first two lines incorporate values from http://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/666 (I guess the URL changed since the site was accessed by the previous author). The ALA value is given on the wiki page, though the database does not distinguish between different 18:3 fatty acids. Same goes for LA. Zaluzar (talk) 10:05, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect values