Talk:Longjing tea

message: I don't know what's going on here, or why and who put up the picture of that ridiculous hole in the ground, or who told them it was the Dragon well, but I don't think that's true at all.
I've been there myself for one, and while I could have been misled (there might even be more than one called by that name), which I'm not suspecting considering the alternative, a few other facts speaks for my case:
For example, in the Longjing_tea article, it's described as "a well that contains relatively dense water, and after rain the lighter rainwater floating on its surface sometimes exhibits a sinuous and twisting boundary with the well water, which is supposed to resemble the movement of a traditional Chinese dragon."
Also, I have read from other sources that if the water is stirred, the same effect appears.
So, first of all, is it even possible to see the water in that hole the size of a soup bowl?
Much less stir it? Can you reach down at all? Is the water surface even wide enough to exhibit the twisting boundary effect?
Secondly, the governmental website of Hangzhou apparently agrees with me.
This is what the well looks like.
I have been to this particular well, and I have stirred the water, and there is, in fact, a very peculiar effect on the surface.
It's like a knife sharp, zig-zaging edge dividing the surface in two, energetically wriggling its way across the surface.
I don't know what the hole in the ground on the picture is, but it's not the Dragon well.
I have uploaded one of my own pictures from my visit there, put into public domain, and if no one have anything to object, I'll switch the picture to the real well.
Sane Traitor (talk) 14:26, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that government website is a better source than any of the sources that I removed from the article, although I'd still prefer to find more independent sources--the local government has an interest in promoting their area and anything associated with it.  Cazort (talk) 18:12, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: The picture of the well

message: Qiqiang means flag pole, or one bud and one leaf.
Queshe means bird tongue, or one bud and two leaves. Confusingly, some people also refer queshe as one bud and one leaf.
They refer to the parts of Longjing tea that is harvested, and only indirectly the grade. Usually the smaller the leaf and bud the higher the grade.
I have removed these two references from the text, which said that qiqiang is top grade, followed by queshe.
Also to mention that Lianxing is lotus heart, which is a single bud, smaller and younger, therefore higher quality.
The relationship between grade and the type of tea leaves is best described separately. I leave it to a stronger person to do this.
Juliantai 13:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed these again. AdventurousMe (talk) 05:30, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Qiqiang and Queshe

message: Most Chinese green tea is pan fried. Japanese green tea is steamed. The text incorrectly mentioned that most green tea is steamed. I have removed it.
Juliantai 13:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pan Frying and Steaming

message: In the world of tea, the term 'fermentation' refers to the drying of the freshly picked leaves, resulting in enzymatic oxidation. This oxidation is stopped by frying or steaming the leaves before they completely dry out. should be somewhere else, I've left it in for now.
As is the case with other green teas, Dragonwell tea leaves are unfermented. When steeped, the tea produces a yellow-green color, gentle pure aroma, and a rich flavor. The tea is contains vitamin C, amino acids should not really be here, because this is common to all green teas
I have also replaced all occurances of Dragonwell to Longjing as not to confuse.
--Iateasquirrel 19:29, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: To much info?

message: Per WP:Reliable Sources none of the sources are adequate.  The current sources are Amazing-Green-Tea.com (which is run by a not-very-well-known tea company), Chinese-Tea-Culture.com, which is a self-published site also associated with a not-very-well-known tea company, and teatalk101.blogspot.com, which is a blog, again, associated with a not-very-well-known tea company, not usable as a reliable source per wikipedia's guidelines.  I wouldn't even support using these sources if they were associated with a well-known tea company!
I am going to remove all sources.  There are also a lot of bold claims made here, I agree with the weasel word tag...I am going to remove some unsourced statements too!  Cazort (talk) 15:42, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inadequate Sourcing 

message: I have replaced the picture with artificially green color tealeaves in the glass with a picture donated by the Tea Guardian to reflect what is a fine Longjing tea steeping in a glass. This is also more in agreement with the description of the color of the tea in the article.
Bill Ukers (talk) 02:58, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  replaced the artificially green tealeaves in glass with a better representation 

message: I have moved some content such as the Tiger Spring and naming after certain well to the history and legend section to make this article a bit cleaner. The previous bit about Yixing teapots not suitable for preparing Longjing is misleading, and citing that the minerals from these pots would dissolve into the tea. This must have stemmed from people having access to fake products. Yixing pots have been created and gotten popular in the 18th century exactly for preparing green tea well, including Longjing and other fine green tea. At that time, China had been producing the finest porcelain the world has yet to see and glass was soon popular amongst the elitists. Yixing teapots continued to be renowned for preparing green tea well. A properly primed genuine Yixing pot does not emit taste or smell, other than those for the tea it is primed for. 
As I read on down the article, I find it depressing to read yet more marketing talks such as those about how expensive the tea can get and naming which region is the most "famous". I'll come back to improve them later, if no one is.
Bill Ukers (talk) 03:12, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marketing talks and inaccurate information 

message: Is it worthwhile mentioning the alternate romanizations of longjing? Apart from in mainland China, I haven't seen anywhere that actually spells it "longjing". I've personally encountered "Lung ching", and something like "leong ching". If someone can track down a source perhaps...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.93.41 (talk) 06:08, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Where? If you can provide a reliable source or two giving those alternative names for Longjing, feel free to add them. I'm a local, though, and from firsthand experience I can say that "Longjing", in Hanyu Pinyin, is the romanization I encounter most often. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 15:08, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: "It is actually quite easy to tell if the Longjing is authentic and that is by taste and smell. The aroma and flavors of the inauthentic Longjing teas are nowhere near as complex, or longlasting as the authentic tea. These teas, although similar in appearance are mild in flavor and aroma and do not have the long lasting aftertaste of the original"
A single source is provided for this claim, and that source simply makes the same claim without backing it up. Obviously there aren't a lot of double-blind tea taste trials around, but that still doesn't justify taking the claim of a single website and portraying it as encyclopedic. A forum thread with user experiences would be better.
That being said, I also find it difficult to believe that tea must be grown in the region it was traditionally grown in for it to taste as it should. There's no reason why growers in one reason couldn't produce the same quality in another region. There are obviously some familial secrets that still haven't been commercialized yet, but I doubt they can account for a large difference in taste. LiamSP (talk) 20:05, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authenticity 

message: I don't have time to fix the issues in this article, so I've flagged the whole thing as Improve. It's badly sourced and incoherent and just plain wrong in places. A lot of the errors identified elsewhere on this talk page seem to be being reinserted, serially.
First and foremost, a Chinese speaker needs to look up the Chinese government regulations and use these as a basis for what's written.
A few suggestions: move health benefits away from production. Expand production to include harvest & hand-roasting.
Varieties: divide this into harvest time - Qingmian, Yumian, Yuhou - and  region - create a separate section about where it comes from, including the Gov't regulations and different production areas. 
Possibly also create a section on Longjing Tea outside China where you can dump all the other weird nomenclature. 
The myths also need sorting out, and the whole thing needs a thorough copyedit.
As regard sources, please note that some are sourced from Wikipedia - this one includes "citation needed' (!) http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90782/99727/6937803.html AdventurousMe (talk) 05:37, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Cleanup Required  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Longjing tea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091009034924/http://www.chinese-tea-culture.com/dragon-well-tea.html to http://www.chinese-tea-culture.com/dragon-well-tea.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:40, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified