Talk:White tea

White Tea, Caffeine, and Weasel Words

This little tidbit here:

White tea usually contains buds and young tea leaves, which have been found to contain lower levels of caffeine than older leaves, suggesting that the caffeine content of some white teas may be slightly lower than that of green teas.

Some white teas may have slightly lower caffeine levels than green teas? Some white teas may also have slightly lower caffeine levels than other white teas, I suppose? This unnecessary sentence contributes nothing to the article -- we need to do some research, find out the definitive answer on whether or not white tea has less caffeine than green tea, and put it here. This current sentence helps nobody.

--69.139.5.241 (talk) 19:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Especially since African white teas stand out for their much higher coffeine level, concentrated in the buds (true for both Malawian and Kenyan silver needles). Alexander —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.159.197.34 (talk) 21:35, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

White puerh

I am very skeptical about including White pu-erh tea in this section as being young tea buds does not make it a white tea.

White tea is about processing. White pu-erh probably is processed like a pu-erh tea, not white tea.

Oriental beauty is made from one bud and two leaves. So is a keemun. There are many green teas that are just single buds, or one-bud-one-leaf, none of them is considered a white tea.

Juliantai 13:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

---

The ultimate issue here is that classification is not concrete. I currently have white tea, which is also Pu'erh tea. How is this possible? Because there is naturally overlap. White tea generally comes from the young hairy buds, making the leaves and the water appear white, or at least more so than green tea. Also, the hairs are important because the oils they contain lend to the unique sweet flavor of the tea which is not found in other tea types. If these hairy buds come from the large leaf/ancient trees in Yunnan Provence and are processed like Sheng Pu'erh than they maintain the characteristics of both white tea and Pu'erh tea. You could call it aged white tea. However, you are probably more likely to find it early on in which case it's closer to "regular" white tea. "Regular" white tea goes through a delicate roasting process which prevents it from further oxidization and microbial fermentation (to a certain degree).

DaBOB (talk) 10:08, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

White tea consists of buds

I have removed the following statement:

White tea is tea made from new growth buds and young leaves of the plant Camellia sinensis.

By Roderick H. Dashwood, "Micronutrient Information Center - Tea". Linus Pauling Institute, Oregon State University http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/phytochemicals/tea/

While the above statement is generally true, it does not chacterised white tea. Green tea is made from young buds. Like white tea, it can be one bud, one-bud-one-leaf or one-bud-two-leaf.

More rarely, oolong tea (Oriental beauty), red tea (Keemun) is made from one-bud-and-two-leaf too.

White tea is characterised by its processing, not leaf style.

I have also removed the following statement as they appear in the same place and seems to imply buds and leaves characterise whiet tea:

As white teas contain buds and leaves, whereas other teas are mainly leaves, the dried tea does not look green and has a pale appearance.

Health and Tea FAQs". The University of Arizona http://www.publichealth.arizona.edu/Divisions/HPS/TeaStudies/TeaStudyFAQs.aspx

Roderick H. Dashwood, "Spring/Summer 2005 Research Report - Tea Time". Linus Pauling Institute, Oregon State University http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/ss05/teatime.html

White tea appears pale green or silvery grey for two reasons. First, because it has younger leaves, as the above pointed out. Second, because the white tea plants (Baihao, Dabao etc) have very fat buds with white downy hairs.

The modern invention of white tea comes with the breakthough in 1857 of the successful cultivation of modern white tea plants, which have these unusual characteristics to make white tea processing feasible in large commercial scale.

Certain green tea can have whitish leaves as well (such as the Anji Baicha), but that doesn't make them white tea.

Similarly, white tea pearl appears greyish white, but is actually processed like a green tea.

Juliantai 13:41, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

---

I am curious about this Anji Baicha (安吉白茶） you've mentioned. I'm actually drinking it as I write this and recall that the woman who sold it to me was convinced that it was white tea. I was convinced that she didn't know what she was talking about. I asked where the hairs are and if the leaves were the young buds. She said no, it's a different genus/type of tea and that's why it's white tea. I'm not sure this is possible, but it could be my understanding of her Chinese was not so good. And it also could be that she was just flat out lying to me to make a sale. I will admit it's a light tea, and some of the leaves are actually white but this is not white tea. It does not have the sweet flavor. White tea leaves will actually turn green as the hairs are removed in the steeping process, whereas these tea leaves are literally white.

This brings up what you've also said though, that there are different plants used for white tea. How are these plants different?

Also, I'm not convinced on the history of white tea. The term has been used since at least the Tang Dynasty, though not to describe white tea. Can't remember my source on this but I'll try to bring it here if I do.

DaBOB (talk) 10:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

White tea and caffeine

I can't find a definitive answer on whether white tea has more or less caffeine than green and black tea. The Linus Pauling site insists white tea has more caffeine. Other sources (such as Uncle Lee's Tea Co., who make an organic white tea blend) insist it has only a fraction of the caffeine of black tea. Frustrated, I went so far as to Googlefight the terms "white tea has less caffeine" and "white tea has more caffeine"; FWIW the "less" contestant won 4 to 1. Likewise for "white tea is low in caffeine" and "white tea is high in caffeine". I note that the article doesn't seem to make a claim either way. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 17:24, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Tricky. Not something I know. I would not automatically and without proper documentation trust such as source as Uncle Lee's Tea Co. I think from glancing at the Linus P. inst. report White Tea has much lower caffeine content. This [1] has some articles (Use Babel or Google translate) but I am not sure. An open one this. --Iateasquirrel 17:59, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

I emailed a few companies that carry white tea. Updated with responses: One said White tea has approximately the same amount of caffeine as all other teas (I've heard the "all tea has the same amount of caffeine" thing before, but then why do so many disagree?), one said it has slightly less than green tea, and one said it has about 15 mg per cup (as opposed to 20 for green and 40 for black). Indium 02:55, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

This was to be expected really. I presume that technically this is a very tricky thing to mention, without some evaluationl. For example take two Oolong teas, something like traditionally processed Shui Xian from Wuyi and pelleted Jade Tieguanyin from Anxi; I am guessing they will have some sizable difference in caffeine. Same probably applies to White tea, like take a low grade Shou Mei tea and Bai Hao Yinzhen tea, there will probably be quite a difference there too. I think the page should reflect this by presenting the results of your informal survey raw and saying that there is always going to be confusion over this. Just my view! --Iateasquirrel 15:01, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I found an interesting, yet no more official, explanation at a site called "Interesting Thing of the Day" on white tea:

I’ve read some claims that white tea has more caffeine than green or black tea, but in fact it has much less. Well, sort of. The caffeine is present in the leaf when it is harvested, so a given mass of leaves from a particular plant will have a given mass of caffeine—and that’s true regardless of how long the leaves are permitted to oxidize. So, ignoring differences between plants and plantations (which can be significant), any tea leaf will have as much caffeine as any other. The difference is how much of that caffeine makes its way out of the tea leaf and into your cup. Brewed white tea has much less caffeine per cup than brewed green, oolong, or black tea (with increasing levels in that order)—partly because the leaves are larger, partly because they underwent less mechanical processing, and partly because the water for brewing is cooler.

I'm not sure I quite accept that -- the leaves used to make white tea are smaller according to the WP article ("young leaves (new-growth buds)") and the dried white teas I've seen are no different in cut size then black teas. Furthermore, I expect most people will use the same temperature water (i.e. "hot") for white tea as they would for black or green tea.

- Keith D. Tyler ¶ 17:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

To clear this up, from what I have read:

Leaf Size. The white teas of very high quality will be made of only top un-opened buds. Teas of lower quality will have more and more of the leaf added in, generally going down the tea plant stem. In general the leaves are hence smaller than those used for most Oolong teas. However most high quality Red, Yellow and Green teas also use only top buds whilst lower qualities use larger leaf. Hence in product of similar quality the size of the leaf should be similar, there are geographical and genetical variations.

Water temperature. It is claimed that White teas are best prepared with slightly cooler water than other teas, about 80C. Numerous references for this.

Does anyone else think that the WP article should present a balanced view, hence just dump some facts and references and show that there is an ongoing debate and that there are geographical and processing techniques which vary. --Iateasquirrel 01:41, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Virtually every source I've ever seen does in fact say to use cooler water for non-black teas. [2] Indium 10:24, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Black as in Hong Cha I presume. I am doubtful whether this is the case, certainly for Oolong tea, Red Tea (what is known in the west as Black Tea), Black Tea (as in Guang Xi tea) and raw Pu-Erh should all be prepared at 100C or in reality a little less. A master may vary the temperature very marginally, I presume. I think that only for Yellow tea, Green tea and White tea is lower temprature used, or so most places say. One must also note that traditionally the darker teas raw Pu-erh, Black tea, Oolong and Red Tea are prepared in Zi Sha pottery; whilist the White, Green and Yellow teas are generally prepared in Porcelain (though some like to use Duan Ni clay teapots). This may affect caffeine content in some way.

Also the destruction of tea via tea-bags probably has very different results, the surface area is much greater and the quality of the tea lower. --Iateasquirrel 00:50, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

- James Moore ¶ 23:10, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

In fact, this is an interesting question. Caffein serves the plant as an anti-herbivory agent (insect neurotoxin). It is clear that immature leaves are nutrient sinks and more tender than mature leaves. In general one often finds that herbivores seem to prefer the immature leaves of most species. So, on the one hand, one could imagine that the plant would have an interest to produce higher amounts of caffein in immature leaves as a defense (ergo Higher caffein in White tea). On the other hand, the observation that insects prefer immature leaves might indicate that the plants simply have not had the time to accumulate high caffein levels (ergo Lower caffein in White tea). I found this in the peer-reviewed journal J Agric Food Chem (2003, 51(7):1864-73) "the old tea leaves contain less caffeine but more EGCG and total catechins than young ones." Alas, the question remains open since "White" tea was not examined in this study. The production of caffein could easily be strongly correlated with light exposure. I will email the authors and suggest they repeat the experiment with white tea. If the result is "caffein lower" this could be a significant selling point.

In Mutation Research 495 (2001) 61-74, Santana-Rios et al studied extracts of Exotica China White tea and Dragonwell Premium Green tea. They brewed the tea at 2g tea leaves for 100ml water for 5 minutes, and found that the white tea contained 4.109% caffeine, and the green tea contained 2.014% caffeine. For 100ml, this would be 82mg caffeine for the white tea and 40mg caffeine for the green tea. These are two data points- a conclusion should not be made from that. But it calls into question any source which says "white tea contains less caffeine than green tea", that hasn't measured it. MatthewEHarbowy 18:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Another issue could be density: Ie if using loose-leaf tea by the teaspoonful (rather than pre-weighed tea bags), it might weigh a different amount by the variety of tea used. I've also heard that the majority of the caffeine exits the tea leaf normally in about the first 45 seconds of brewing (not sure if that's accurate), so even at a lower water temperature it might allow for around the same amount of caffeine to enter the cup. Too many variables. 69.85.180.209 08:12, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I would like to add the following: Two different sites reference some un-referenced report that gives caffeine ranges for various teas and coffee. I cannot find the original source. Here is their data and links:

A Department of Nutritional Services report provides the following ranges of caffeine content for a cup of tea made with loose leaves:

Black Tea: 23 - 110 mg Oolong Tea: 12 - 55 mg Green Tea: 8 - 36 mg White Tea: 6 – 25 mg

http://www.thefragrantleaf.com/caffeine.html

another pages attributes this same source and adds:

Coffee generally contains 60 - 180 mg of caffeine. http://www.teacuppa.com/tealibrary.asp?id=10 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.33.49.251 (talk) 20:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

External links...

I find it rather strange that Babelcarp somehow ended up under external links; its a clear 'dictionary' of tea and it can be used as a reference for most tea questions, its certainly a source. 69.123.33.133 I cant see why you moved it. --Iateasquirrel 00:10, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Some links from WhiteTea.cc seem to be legitimate, others (i.e. they seem to be original) but others are blatantly spam. --Iateasquirrel 19:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Hence added to External Links, does this seem about right? --Iateasquirrel 22:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

No. Read WP:EL for the policies about what is acceptable as an external link. In general, that site, which does not even self-identify or self-pronounce any author names or editorial standards, is not suitable as either a WP:Reliable Source or an external link. I don't think it even meets the weaker standards under WP:ELMAYBE. Cazort (talk) 19:25, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Health benefits

WHen the article said that a "recent study" showed the health effects of white tea, it didn't clarify which study it was(ie.what lab, which doctor...)

The health section should either be sourced correctly or deleted. It reads like an advert for White Tea and I have never seen such strong claims in any scientific literature. 130.123.104.22 (talk) 22:19, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

History

The history section seems to have remarkably little information in it. The only historical information given is a speculation that tea may have originally been prepared like white tea. Unless someone finds something good to add to it, or is very attached to the section for some reason, I will delete it soon.--Lesnail 18:48, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• The appropriate course of action when you come across a section that is too short is to add the {{expandsection}} tag, which I have now done for you. | Mr. Darcy talk 03:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Clearly, you would put the information in elsewhere if you were going to delete it. Anonywiki 22:14, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Fried Tea??

I assume "The leaves are steamed or fried to inactivate polyphenol oxidation, and then dried." is a typo. The article later discusses fired teas.

Should this be changed?

Fried as in dry fried in a metal wok. It's done by hand. It's the 'heat shock' that the article mentions earlier, the process known as shaqing in Putonghua. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.156.43.202 (talk) 15:57, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

references/citation

This article is completely unreferenced. I notice that one uncited health claim was removed recently; why wasn't the whole article removed (especially the history section, which I have tried to wikify a little) :) Abtract 22:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I have tried to only remove claims which were dubious and which had been tagged needing citation for a while. MatthewEHarbowy 23:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Having been a student of tea in China for some years now, I find many of the postings on tea in Wikipedia to be incorrect. But I would like to get some guidance as to how to proceed in overhauling the tea entries.

For example, the claim is unsubstantiated and furthermore incorrect that white tea is "technically the oldest form of tea because it is the first tea ever consumed" (White Tea/History). This claim has no citation. However finding adequate citation is not easy when discussing teas because the vast system of knowledge is largely oral. Tea merchants and tea-pot merchants that I find knowledgeable still disagree as to when the first productions of white tea (as it is understood in China today) began. What is today known as white process tea, which is to be differentiated from teas named "white" tea, which may be green or oolong teas, may have only come into creation in the last few centuries. White tea was classified in 1876 as a black tea because it was not initially cooked like a green tea, to deactivate internal enzymes and external microbes. But unlike black tea, white process tea, as it is known today, is not piled to begin the anaerobic decomposition or fermentation reaction. White process tea can be thought of as the least processed of teas, for this reason. But nowhere in the tea literature that I have read, or in my many interviews with students at tea universities or professors or other knowledgeable, have I come across the claim that white tea is the first tea. Claims have been made that green tea or red tea or most convincingly, black tea, is the oldest form of tea. However these are longer discussions.

I would appreciate any guidance I can be given as to how to proceed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shujian (talk • contribs) 14:46, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

withered or steamed?

Some pages, such as [3], claim white tea is steamed, and sometimes fermented (oxidized).

Other pages, such as [4], don't claim that it is steamed, but instead claim that it is withered and sun-dried.

It is clear that the distinctive character of white tea is the silver needles, however these hairs are found on other teas such as golden needle Yunnan. It is not clear that one can conclude that white tea is chemically different from green tea based upon the analysis of a single white tea and a single green tea from one vendor in a single test, as in the citation of Santana-Rios et al (Mutat Res 495 61-74 2001). Catechin levels in tea plants vary widely and a subject to variation in clone, light, weather, age, fertilizer, etc. It sounds and smells like marketing speak. One cannot tell if a given tea is "white tea" because no definitive test is asserted.

It is my opinion that white tea should be merged with green tea, unless it can be shown that there is a distinctive test, such as a golden appearance to the leaf (versus green, such as found on pai mu tan) is the distinctive charaterization, and can show that a single processing variation (be it shading, which would possible lower chlorophyll production and impart yellow; or steaming, which would freeze the enzymes; or withering and sun-drying, which would potentially also convert green to yellow) is the distinctive difference between silver needle white teas and other teas which have silver or gold needles.

Also, if the argument be made that say, only Fujian tea can be white, then a scientific classification must be showing how the soil, growing conditions, or plant clonal variety is specific to the region, or else the distinction is a legalistic one, such as a Beaujolais or Champagne appellation. This should be stated.

MatthewEHarbowy 19:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Any site that claims the white tea is fermented has obviously lost it. According to several papers (cited before my sig) white tea differs from green because it lacks a rolling/shaping stage; similar to the rolling process that black tea undergoes, but after the pan frying. See the attached figure I generated.

Finally dissecting up food and beverages can be a tricky. Wine is an interesting example because it has become so formal in the last 80 years since the Appellation d'origine contrôlée; before that such definitions were in the hands of the winemaking and the consumer. Without that formal guidelines you just have to accept the definition, i.e. some Huang Guanyin/Iron Goddess of Mercy teas seems very much like a green tea in appearance and taste, and Bi Luo Chun seems like a white tea. I would say white tea deserves it's own page from green tea, as Oolong deserves its own page from black tea. Each of those pair is similar, and can produce teas similar to each other (and some Oolongs seem very much like green teas too), but they are each their own.

British Journal of Pharmacology (2005) 145, 926–933. doi:10.1038/sj.bjp.0706255; published online 16 May 2005 Heteroactivation of cytochrome P450 1A1 by teas and tea polyphenols Dana L Anger, Maria-Alexandra Petre and Denis J Crankshaw

Inhibition of β-catenin/Tcf activity by white tea, green tea, and epigallocatechin-3-gallate (EGCG): minor contribution of H2O2 at physiologically relevant EGCG concentrations Wan-Mohaiza Dashwooda, Gayle A. Ornera and Roderick H. Dashwood Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications Volume 296, Issue 3, 23 August 2002, Pages 584-588

Potent antimutagenic activity of white tea in comparison with green tea in the Salmonella assay Gilberto Santana-Riosa, Gayle A. Ornera, Adams Amantanaa, Cynthia Provostb, Shiau-Yin Wuc and Roderick H. Dashwood Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis Volume 495, Issues 1-2, 22 August 2001, Pages 61-74 Bilz0r 03:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Wit all this debate, wouldn't it be more accurate to simply reference and explain the uncertainty in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ride the Hurricane (talk • contribs) 12:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

inconsistent statements on catechins

The introduction to the article says that the processing method for white tea makes it retain more catechins than other varieties of tea. Then further down, we have a sentence that in the first half says white tea actually has fewer catechins than green tea, but in the second half (of the same sentence!) says that it has approximately the same quantities as green tea. Which is it? If sources disagree, we should at least point that out... right now we say three different things, each as if they were undisputed fact. --Delirium 23:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I tried to read the abstract of the referenced article and I dont get it. Unfortunately the full article is not available for free on this website. Maybe someone with access to scientific papers could verify it. --helohe (talk) 23:12, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

After reading all the papers/websites cited by this article, and doing my own research, the only paper I can find that actually measures catechin content in green tea and white tea is: Santana-Rios G, Orner GA, Amantana A, Provost C, Wu SY, Dashwood RH. "Potent antimutagenic activity of white tea in comparison with green tea in the Salmonella assay."., Mutation Research-Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis, Vol. 495, no. 1-2, pp. 61-74. (22 Aug 2001).

The results break down like so

Constituent	White tea (ug/mL)	White tea (%)	Green tea (ug/mL)	Green tea (%)
Catechin	0.109	0.543	0.405	2.024
Epigalo-catechin	0.465	2.324	0.044	0.219
Epigallocatechin gallate	1.229	6.146	1.222	6.11
Epicatechin	0.031	0.153	0.190	0.949
Epicatechin gallate	0.619	3.095	0.403	2.014

Teas were brewed at 2 g tea leaves per 100 ml (2%, w/v) does not say what temperature (I assume boilding) for 5 minutes. Unsure which white tea.Bilz0r 03:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

---

I am pleased to see people having the scientific mind to cross check statements and figures. The studies of the few papers I have access to for the comparison of catechin content between white teas and green teas have not been comprehensive — only few samples were taken and most were not clear what those samples exactly were. I guess there is not enough interests to do better studies without a good commercial motivation behind. However, some editing need to be done to the inconsistency in this article and the points without reference need to be accordingly amended. I shall do it since no body has.

Bill Ukers (talk) 08:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Article rewrite

1) Article should not present white tea as Chinese only. Since it's grown and consumed elsewhere, the article should present a global perspective. (Hence the addition of Chinese characters here is inappropriate. As would be adding Indian and African words, and words in every other language whose people consider white tea a part of their culture.)

2) The history section needs to collect sources regarding the origin, distribution, and historical use of white tea. The existing section (which I deleted) had only a marginally topical annecdote about what peasants in China used to serve when tea wasn't available. (To amplify, this usage is a different word sense: "This usage is related to plain boiled water...". It isn't that Wiki articles can't contain more than one word sense, it's that this marginal historical meaning was the only sense described, while the main article topic wasn't described whatever.)

3) Central issues are buried in the article under a somewhat chaotic mish-mash of facts: "Caffeine content of green and white teas are similar, though both depend on factors such as the variety of tea, the cut and length of the leaf, and the method of steeping." These are important concepts, and the rest of the article should take them into consideration. I.e., what exactly does it mean to say that caffeine or catechin or theobromine content is such-and-such? By weight? By brewed volume? By typical amount of consumption? By amount assimilated? It's misleading to throw around study results without explaining their implications.

4) The section on brewing, for example, is not much better than original research. People brew tea in many ways, to achieve many effects. Identifying "finer teas" as those standing up to longer infusion sounds suspeciously like a circular definition. Of course, phrases such as "highly prized" and "highest grade" should be explained, or omitted. Piano non troppo (talk) 23:18, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

less processed?

The claims of being less processed seem to be untrue. They seem to be claiming that steaming is less processed than drying, but that doesn't seem logical at all. Steaming requires addition of a new ingredient (water) as well as heat (cooking). Drying does not add any ingredients and while it typically implies that high temperature was used I would imagine no where near as high as if steamed. 68.188.25.170 (talk) 08:23, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Confusing sentence

I am confused by this sentence:

White tea (Chinese: 白茶; pinyin: báichá) is a lightly oxidized[1] tea grown and harvested almost exclusively in China, primarily in the Fujian province.[2]

This sentence sounds like White tea is a unique type of plant, but from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camellia_sinensis

"White tea, green tea, oolong, pu-erh tea and black tea are all harvested from [Camellia sinensis], but are processed differently to attain different levels of oxidation

129.2.129.219 (talk) 13:59, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Contents/Health overlap

It seems that these two sections of the article say the same things. Should be edited for redundancy. MR.264 (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Agree. This is specifically what i came to highlight. The health benefits of the tea are inextricably linked to the contents. Health benefits should then be a subsection under contents. As a preliminary suggestion, maybe have a general outline of what tea includes, comparing and contrasting to other teas. Then, in the next sub-section, the health benefits of particular contents can be explored in more detail specific to white tea.

unfortunately i don't have the time to do this and this page doesn't look too active. 80.176.89.230 (talk) 12:31, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Suggested External Link / Conflict of Interest

I think RateTea's page on White Tea would make a good addition to this page as an external link. I have a clear conflict of interest in adding this link, as I am the founder and editor of that site, and I also derive financial benefit from the advertising on it, so I am posting here to ask for discussion from other editors about whether they find this would be a good addition to the page. People may also want to discuss whether or not it would be more appropriate as a source.

Editors may wish to check Wikipedia's guidelines on external links. I think the page contains information that I think is useful for a thorough understanding of white tea but not suitable for direct inclusion in this page, including (1) collecting in a single place a listings of specific companies selling white tea, the teas available from these companies, and the regions in which these teas are produced (2) original research about the inconsistency in the definitions of white tea--material which, to my knowledge, is not available anywhere else except in self-published sources like blogs.

Thanks in advance for your input! Cazort (talk) 19:36, 2 August 2012 (UTC)