Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/Archive 18

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20→Archive 25

Notable Restaurants needing articles

Having recently participated in a notability discussion related to restaurant reviews, I did some research and created this subpage: Notable Restaurants needing articles to assist and prompt editors who might be interesting in expanding restaurant coverage in WP. --Mike Cline (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Moved page to Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Foodservice taskforce/Notable Restaurants needing articles per advice of User:Jerem43. --Mike Cline (talk) 19:23, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Thomcord grapes

Inspired by a DYK on the main page concerning grapes, I have created an article for the Thomcord variety, which happens to be my favorite... when I can find it! It has been nominated for DYK, and I plan to put it up for GAC and possibly FAC very soon. Writing about grapes (instead of lemurs—my specialty) was a very educational experience. Yet I'm worried that my lack of experience in this field may necessitate some attention from an expert. Would someone who is more knowledgeable of grapes please look over the article before I post it for GAC? (I will be posting this message on WikiProject Wine as well.) – VisionHolder « talk » 23:42, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

...eh... I think I'll just nominate it for GAC now, but the FAC nomination will definitely wait for a feedback from one or both of these projects. I've also written an email to David Ramming (its creator) for his feedback as well. – VisionHolder « talk » 00:00, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I've got that GA review for you. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 18:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Mosodeng for deletion

The article Mosodeng is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mosodeng until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 16:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Chili

I thought people here would be interested in a discussion I just started at Talk:Chili con carne. I think that article name is incorrect, and it should be called Chili (stew). This is more appropriate as not all chilis are made with meat (con carne). Join the discussion there for input. — Timneu22 · talk 00:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Category:Tea and coffee stubs

Please note that I have nominated Category:Tea and coffee stubs for splitting and deleting. Feel free to express your opinions at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2011/January/12#Category:Tea and coffee stubs. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:55, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

History of Wine Article

The History of wine article has not yet been assessed against the "B-Class" criteria. Would like it to be assessed. Adamdaley (talk) 06:05, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Online Reliable Sources

Hi folks. I am trying to improve a couple food articles and am wondering if the Food Project has any sort of directory of online food sites considered RS, or if anyone has some good sites to suggest. Thanks, The Interior(Talk) 23:53, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

It depends on the type of articles you are talking about. If they are restaurants or commercial food companies you can look at the industry trades such as Nation's Restaurant News. If they are about a cuisine or dish from a specific cuisine, look at the parent article (Xxx cuisine) and see if there is anything usable there. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 01:14, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
When it comes to food products, well-known dishes/cuisines or notable restaurants, many local libraries now have online access (at no cost) to some of the premium database research sites. I've had luck with this method, as it allows you to quickly dig up archived articles from industry-specific trade publications (like Nation's Restaurant News). I've also found these resources to be helpful:
Is there a certain article/topic area that you have in mind? Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 22:23, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for great pointers, both of you. The article I was trying to source is Chouquette but I would also like to make some improvements to Poutine. The Interior(Talk) 23:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Happy to help. I actually found a handful of solid references for Chouquette and Poutine by doing a google books search:
You'll notice that only certain pages of each book are viewable when searching with Google Books. I find it to be a helpful starting point, and it often points me in the right direction of what books to seek out at the library or book store. Jeff Bedford (talk) 02:04, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Merge these two panning articles

I've had my account here for a long time, but I'm not a very active editor, so I don't know all the procedures. Apologies if this isn't the way to do this. Sugar panning is a "high" importance stub. Cold panned process is a "low" importance stub. Both are about essentially the same thing. It seems to me that cold panned should be merged into sugar panning. I've borrowed Sugar Confectionery Manufacture from the library and will be updating sugar panning anyway. --Elijah (talk) 05:27, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Big mistake

Kefalotyri and Graviera

  • Kefalotyri means yellow cheese in wheels,kefali is greek for cheese-wheel and tyri is cheese, all yellow cheese in wheels are considered Kefalotyri (exaple: reggato kefalotyri) but if it is used along it usually means graviera cheese.
  • plz correct it.
It may be true historically that kefalotyri refers to all cheese in wheels, however normal modern usage refers to a particular hard cheese, usually used grated. See for example http://www.dodoni.eu/Home/Products/HardCheese/Kefalotiri.xml.aspx?Language=2 or the Babiniotis and Andriotis dictionaries. --Macrakis (talk) 20:01, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Cuba_Libre#Requested_move

All input welcome. Cheers. walk victor falk talk 00:25, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed revision of Gatorade article

Hello fellow Wikiproject Food and Drink folks, I've proposed a revision of the Gatorade article here and thought this would be of interest to some of you. If it is, please feel free to join in on the discussion on that article's Talk page. Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 03:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

List of meat animals

I have started a discussion at Talk:List of meat animals#Scope, again to determine whether the scope of the list allows for a valid stand-alone list. All input is welcome.

Thank you, -- Black Falcon (talk) 18:09, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Seven layer dip

Apparently, part of the American Super Bowl ritual includes a Seven layer dip. Although it's a few days late, just figured someone (esp. Americans?) on this Wikiproject may be interested in expanding Seven layer dip or Dip (food)? Perhaps by next year? :-) Just a thought. Shreevatsa (talk) 08:08, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

My goodness, the Seven layer dip article is in dire need of help. Not a single citation in sight! I'll do my best to bring it closer in line with Wikipedia content standards over the next week, and will give a heads-up right here once I am done so that you and others can take a gander. Out of curiosity, I checked the stats for this article and you are right--it does get a lot more attention around Super Bowl time: stats.grok.se/en/201102/Seven_layer_dip Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 20:36, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Why should all Taiwanese foods be listed under Chinese?

I see this as another attempt to Chinese-everything that's Taiwanese. Bubble tea or boba is purely Taiwanese. Grilled squid is also purely Taiwanese. All foods have its origins. American hot dogs derived from German frankfurter, so why is it called German hot dogs? Did Taiwanese oyster vermicelli really come from China? Please look into it. Are they exactly alike? If not, it should not be listed as sub-category of Chinese food. What about eel noodles? I don't think it came from China. What about the Taiwanese foods that have Japanese influence? Why is Taiwanese food not listed as a sub-category of Japanese food? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.229.45 (talk • contribs)

Just like California cuisine is part Cuisine of the United States. Ignoring the disputed nature of Taiwan, Taiwanese cuisine is still a subset of Chinese cuisine. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 21:34, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


Can we have a rating for importance for Romaine lettuce, please?

The article on Romaine lettuce gives the article a rating of stub, but does not have an importance rating for the article. Can this be rectified, please? Thank you in advance for any co-operation here. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 22:23, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

A little project on Michelin stars

Alrighty, so it's kind of a niche interest, but I've been trying to fill out and create articles for Michelin starred restaurants, starting with New York. Any help is certainly appreciated. There's still a lot to go and the articles I've created need a lot of improvement. Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 06:33, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I'd be happy to be of help -- can you let me know of a few articles that you've already created or improved in pursuit of this project? While I'm no expert on New York (I only visit there once every two years or so), I could certainly copy-edit a few of the articles that you've tackled already. Always helps to have a second set of eyes. Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 20:28, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
I've gotta look through for the plenty of others that need to be edited, but off the top of my head the one's that I created (all of which are pretty miserable stubs) are
And this one's chicago but I may as well throw it in
There's certainly a lot needed (I'm not sure copy-editing would even be enough) but they certainly are all deserving of articles at least.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll be happy to take a closer look at these ones and will follow up with any resulting suggestions/thoughts on your user talk page. If any others have input on notability guidelines specific to restaurants, please do chime in. In approaching this project I might recommend emphasizing quality over quantity of articles. More simply put, 'tis better (for both Wikipedia's aims and your own use of time well spent) to create 3 high-quality articles than 30 start-class articles. I find it helps to approach articles one or two at a time. In the meantime, I think you'll find this guide to be quite helpful: How to write a great article. Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 22:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I certainly agree with quality over quantity. But I often find (especially with new editors) that people are much more likely to work on improving an article if it already exists, rather than having to go through the daunting task of laying out all of the framework.--Yaksar (let's chat) 22:59, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Well said, Yaksar. We all have different strengths here, and oftentimes the best articles are a result of Wikipedians with complementary skills tackling different aspects of each article. I'll follow up in the next week or so with ideas/feedback on the articles you listed above. Jeff Bedford (talk) 00:12, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Gyro and gyros and shawarma and döner kebab

Discussion at talk:gyros. IMO these are content forks and should be merged; there isn't any significant regional difference (certainly the Turkish one is just the Greek with a Turkish name; I haven't been to Lebanon), and what there is can be more coherently illustrated by describing them together. Also, AFAIK "gyros" is not a singular form in English, or at least not a common one, so the page should be moved, maybe to gyro (food). — kwami (talk) 22:56, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I personally agree that gyros and shawarma and döner kebab represent a content fork, but note that gyro is is dab page should stay that way. P. D. Cook Talk to me! 19:43, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
We could really use some neutral third-party contributions to the discussion on this merger. This is a special case of a more general phenomenon, where articles are fragmented along arbitrary national/​ethnic/​linguistic lines instead of following the logical structure of the content. --Macrakis (talk) 19:14, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
I wholeheartedly agree. See my comment below. Pyrope 00:11, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Kebabs are NOT Gyros

Kebabs are NOT Gyros. If you've ever eaten both, you know this. Pure and Simple. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.147.210.162 (talk) 00:53, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

You are right that they are not the same thing, but the articles mentioned above do duplicate some content. P. D. Cook Talk to me! 15:32, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Wrong, while kebabs are not gyros, gyros are kebabs. A kebab is merely "meat roasted or grilled on a skewer or spit" (Oxford American Dictionary). Not all waterfowl are ducks, but all ducks are waterfowl. Pyrope 17:40, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
There are two issues here:
  • The word "kebab" in English can refer to shish kebab (chunks of meat cooked on a small skewer), doner kebab (slices of meat stacked up on a vertical spit and sliced to order), and to sandwiches made with shish kebab or doner kebab meat. In Turkish, of course, kebab is much broader than that, but that's another issue.
  • Doner kebab is essentially the same thing as gyro -- in fact, in Greece, gyros used to be called 'doner' (ντονέρ). There is lots of variation in doner kebab/gyro sandwiches, but this variation does not seem to correlate closely with the name. There is similarly lots of variation in pizza.... --Macrakis (talk) 19:19, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
In English, kebab means "stuff grilled or roasted on a stick", there is no requirement that it be shish or doner, or indeed souvlaki, shami, or random assortments of things put on a bamboo skewer and sat on a backyard barbie. They are all forms of kebab. The usage is different to that in the original language, but as this is the English language Wikipedia it is the English usage that matters. We aren't here to tell people how to use words; we describe not proscribe. What we have here are nationalists and pedants making silly splits in the same hair. Pyrope 00:09, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
I am inclined to agree with Pyrope, as the English WP we use the English conventions the definition of a kebab in English is a food cooked on a spit (stick). My advice is the same as his, go with this definition and stay away from ethnic and nationalistic divisions that are nothing more than tempests in a teapot. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 05:40, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I also do not like to enter these national pride issues, but in A Dictionary of Food and Nutrition. Ed. David A. Bender. Oxford University Press 2009., the term "kebab" is defined as "Turkish for roast meat. Shishkebab is small pieces of mutton rubbed with salt, pepper, etc., and roasted on a skewer (shish in Turkish) sometimes interspaced with vegetables. Shashlik is a Georgian version." ... then gyros does not have an entry. As far as I checked Encyclopedia Brittanica do not have an entry for kebab, but specific entries for the variations. --Anneyh (talk) 10:40, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
What you are quoting is the origin of the word in a specialized book, not the actual, standard dictionary definition. The standard dictionary definition is what we should be using to help form the base of what would be the more common term used in English. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 10:59, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Lactation within the scope of this project?

Noticed that Talk:Lactation shows a banner of this project, does that make any sense? Richiez (talk) 23:51, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

That was place there three years ago in a bot tagging run. IMHO, yes, because milk is the very first thing we ever consume as mammals. It is the primal, most fundamental food that we, as humans, provide for our young. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 11:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

What is the precise physicochemical nature of resistant starch (RS3) ?

I removed this post because its author is publicizing a research paper that he had written. As it appears to be self promotional, I believe its inclusion violates the guidelines of Wikipedia and deleted it as such. If anyone disagrees with me, please feel free to research it and restore if I am incorrect. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 19:28, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

This deletion has been bugging me. The author seems to have disclosed his self interest, and one link to a third-party published journal article of which he is the author is not prohibited by conflict of interest rules: "Editing in an area in which you have professional or academic expertise is not, in itself, a conflict of interest. Using material you yourself have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant and conforms to the content policies. Excessive self-citation is strongly discouraged." Additionally, this is a talk page, not an article page. The subject matter of the post is highly technical, and may not appear to some with an interest in food to be all that relevant, but I'm quite certain it is relevant to both food and health based upon the reading I have done in relation to bread, wheat, and starch topics, as well as health. On the amylase-Resistant Starch page, it didn't appear there are any citations with as early a date (I need to double check to be sure) as Berry's cite. PubMed has some listings for a "Berry CS" using the same generalized technical words, a signature of sorts, suggesting he is who he claims to be. While it is likely certain Berry is biased, as we all are, each in our own ways, he is clearly a scientist with some demonstrable expertise in the subject matter, and I worry that deleting all of his words is censorship of the worst kind. (I don't have time to fully flesh this out right now, but am strongly leaning towards reversing the deletion, even though I personally am biased against "pay for knowledge" constructs.) Gzuufy (talk) 18:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. It's a Talk page. I thought the main rules were to be civil, assume good faith, etc. The post seemed a little odd and random, but I was surprised to see it deleted. Boneyard90 (talk) 00:38, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Boneyard90, I decided to not restore the edit due to the burden of evidence being on anyone restoring something previously deleted. I could not stand behind all of the deleted statements, though it does seem that some of his post was supported by third-party citations. Gzuufy (talk) 23:36, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Again, I deleted because the posting because the person who placed it here was advertising his own research and its corresponding paper, and, despite this being a talk page, placing links to your own material is improper. If you feel that it doesn't violate the guidelines and a consensus develops stating restoring the post is proper, I have no problem with that. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 05:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

...besides which, this isn't a forum or discussion page for general food issues. Pyrope 12:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

From this project's front page under "Goals", "2. Coordination of editing on food, drink, and restaurant related articles." It could be Berry was asking (albeit in a non-direct way) for help with flawed or incomplete historical citing on the resistant starch page. If so, such a request would seem appropriate here, particularly given that this project's banner is on that article's talk page. If resistant starch is, as you say, too general a topic for this forum, then should the WikiProject Food and Drink banner be removed from that page? Gzuufy (talk) 21:59, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
If there is a specific question relating to resistant starch then it should be brought up on the resistant starch page. If there is a wider question relating to the way that we deal with articles on the chemical components of food then you bring it here. That is by the by, in any case, as this was clearly not a question, comment or suggestion. The section was a didactic statement which ended with an invitation to look at a pay site. That's not discussion, that's spam. The removal was fully justified. Pyrope 15:22, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Pyrope, It's possible it was scientific spam with a free abstract visible as a teaser, but Berry's post could have simply been somewhat or slightly biased, just as all the rest of us humans. Gzuufy (talk) 23:36, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
The posting was an excerpt from his paper as far as I can tell, so I have a hard time believing it was a question in any form. It appears to me it was a solicitation to come look at his paper, and to pay him for the privilege of doing so. The site he linked to is a pay to view research site where individuals post their work and charge others to look at it. If he truly had a question it would have been easier to simply ask about what he wanted to know. If he were seeking someone to perform a peer review on his work this is not the proper forum to do so. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 05:54, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Jerem43, I understand your point of view, though I didn't see any quote marks used indicating some kind of excerpt. If the link was objectionable, then deleting just it would have been sufficient, but I'm not convinced such a link is raw spam, though it could be. You wrote, "...where individuals post their work and charge others to look at it." This statement touches a central policy issue relating to the Financial section of the Conflict of Interest page. It looks to me like ScienceDirect's or Elsevier's employees did that posting, not Berry. If Berry gets a financial cut (like a royalty) of ScienceDirect's pay to view charges, then I'd agree with your deletion, essentially agreeing that the post was a violation of Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy as I understand it. I've looked and cannot find either such public proof or suggestions that "author pays to publish" or that "they pay the author" (royalties or similar), but have found their statement (thus a primary source) that they only publish "journal owned" research papers. Additionally, the link Berry posted here, when followed, shows that the article was originally published in the Journal of Cereal Science. At the risk of being redundant, my greatest reservation is the disincentive, the chilling of speech, given to a recognized and notable expert in the field trying to contribute some of their knowledge to Wikipedia and instead being censored. If the poster was who he said he was, Colin Berry PhD, he is a recognized and journal published cereal scientist and expert in his field. What does any encyclopedia become when the greater communities' true scientific experts are shunned through deletion of their contributions (it's a rhetorical question, I don't plan to discuss this further, but did want to answer you.) Gzuufy (talk) 23:36, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Pasta pictures

Hi everyone! Recently I've started dealing with Template:Pasta the articles on pasta types. First of all, these are almost all woefully weak; there's a lot of expansion and maybe merging needed. But I'm here asking for help from anyone with a camera or some culinary skills. While some of the articles have great pictures, most have none at all. Some of the ones that do have very low quality images, or ones where the pasta is heavily sauced or a part of a dish and not the image's primary focus.

Basically, what I'm asking for are photos of pasta types for the articles that need new or better ones. Ideally these should be unsauced and easy to see. Cooked or uncooked are fine, and how much pasta is in the image is up for whatever you think is best. This should be pretty easy for some of them; I'm sure some of you have pastas in your cabinet that you can take photos of, or maybe you're a better sleuth than I am and can find photos online. Hell, if you find or make some good stuff maybe you'll find a barnstar coming your way. Thanks to anyone who can help!--Yaksar (let's chat) 07:18, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

The best place to start would be Wikimedia Commons, with literally thousands of available images. Here is a good example of a pasta picture:
There is a whole category of pasta images to choose from that will allow you to properly illustrate the articles, with a really good gallery here. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:38, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 07:45, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Mercy (drink) - request for sources

Howdy, After seeing an article mentioning an hangover preventative called Mercy I was looking for sources to see if it passed WP:N. What I found I put in User:Joe407/Mercy (drink). I was wondering if anyone has seen other WP:RS that could give what to work with in creating an article. (of course, editing is also welcome.) Joe407 (talk) 16:56, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Destubbification drive

How would everyone feel about a destubbing drive for the month of April ? We have lots of them in the various category:food and drink stubs that need to be worked on. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 18:14, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

I have expanded Non-alcoholic beverage with as many links to Wiki articles as I could find, and split the page into branded and non-branded sections. Is this OK? cheers Double Happiness (talk) 13:05, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Five grains

I came across this article today and don't know what to make of it. It definitely needs some expert input, and this isn't my area. Voceditenore (talk) 15:52, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

About the page "bean to bar chocolate" - please help me move

hi all

I stumbled on the entry on chocolate "bean to bar" and I should point that the list really has a lot of very misleading information. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bean-to-bar_chocolate_manufacturers

In order to solve this there are 2 options imho: changing the title to something more open like "list of chocolate makers" or start a extremely difficult debate to define what bean-to-bar should be and in extension even on an etymology level what "chocolate" is.

So I would suggest in the short term to rename the title of the page as a fair and honest correction, but user --Kateshortforbob talk very kindly pointed out I cannot do that as a new user. She also suggested to ask for someone here at Food to assists me on "moving" this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EvertJDK (talk • contribs) 16:17, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

It does indeed have many many problems. Fundamentally, I don't see what purpose this page serves. Wikipedia is not a directory, and I fail to see what a bald list of chocolate producers adds. I'd go further than Kateshortforbob and suggest that you list it at WP:AfD, and see if the provokes anyone to justify its existence. Pyrope 22:41, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok, so I did it myself. To comment, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bean-to-bar chocolate manufacturers. Pyrope 13:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Coconut oil

Hello could people take a look at the coconut oil article and give independent third party thoughts on what's going on? Thanks. Lambanog (talk) 19:41, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

An independent view? Ok, but you aren't going to like it. After having read through the various debates both there and at the noticeboard, you sound like an industry stooge attempting to use slight of hand and faulty logic to strongly bias the article in favour of promoting hypothetical (as yet entirely unproven) health benefits of the product. That clear things up for you? Pyrope 22:33, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Sure, no problem, an honest opinion is valued. I do suggest, however, that you as a food lover, and this being the Wikipedia Food Project, look into the research further not just with coconut oil but the whole relationship among saturated fats, unsaturated fats, and carbohydrates. There's an upheaval going on. First saturated fats were bad for you and trans fats were better. Then it was said trans fats are as bad as saturated fats (so replace them with sugar i.e. carbohydrate). Then it is said trans fats are worse than saturated fats. Now it's coming out (actually for the last 10 years) that carbohydrates may be worse than saturated fats too! Are refined carbohydrates worse than saturated fat? An ordinary person coming to Wikipedia to get a rough idea of where everything stands will find—nothing. So much for Wikipedia being a source of information. Anyway if you are content with the establishment (non-)explanation despite the numerous flip-flops then I'll leave you to your oatmeal and low calorie protein shake Lambanog (talk) 04:16, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
This is the problem with food faddism. One week its this, the next week that, the following week something else. Much of these "superfood breakthroughs" are actively researched and promoted by people with a vested interest. They use the kind of spurious, faulty, at times deceitful arguments that state "this food is good for you, it has this ingredient, this other food has an ingredient somewhat like the first food, ergo the second food is good for you". This is garbage, any scientist worth their salt will shoot you down in an instant, and is unfortunately how much of the evidence that you are promoting comes across. It doesn't seem surprising to me that you are unable to provide proper, third party, peer reviewed documentation of the effects that you are claiming. By having standards regarding what constitutes a reliable source we ensure that Wikipedia doesn't become a mire of hearsay and industry puff. As I tuck into my oatmeal (which my family and ancestors have been eating for centuries without ill effect...) I shall think of you sat on your Philippine coconut plantation, dreaming up new ways that you can claim the fruit cures cancer, AIDS and the common cold, yet at the same time leave you with healthy glowing skin and regular bowel movements. Pyrope 13:00, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
But haven't you seen Gilligan's Island??? The great versatility of coconuts is not far exaggerated. Coconut water is close enough in properties to blood plasma that it can be be used as an IV fluid in a pinch. Coconut oil is close enough to human breast milk that its oils are included in infant formula. By the way it doesn't cure AIDS but seems to reduce the viral load. A topical ointment can be made with it and bird's eye chili that can be used as a substitute for something like BenGay for arthritis and rheumatism. My mother has made it before. Smells—but it is effective. I now see something similar being sold in local drugstores. Oh the regular bowel movements part I've heard is wrong, seems constipation is a downside. Lambanog (talk) 14:25, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Non-alcoholic beverage

I have already posted on all the related talk pages I can find but had no response so far. I am not an experienced contributor so would really appreciate some guideance from someone who knows their way around. What I am aiming to do it put together one page where users can find links to all Wikipedia articles on non-alcoholic drinks, divided into branded products, traditional drinks, and 'Mocktails'. Maybe a list of hot beverages could be included too? It seems like such an obvious idea I can't understand why it hasn't been done already. So I have expanded Non-alcoholic beverage with all the drinks I could find, and split into sections as I have said. There was no response to that so I guessed that must have been OK. But looking at Drink the page has it that a soft drink is a drink without alcohol, even though the actual article on soft drinks more reasonably defines the term as to with the presence of CO2 and sweeteners. That was my understanding too. Even more worryingly, someone has stated there that 'Non-alcoholic beverages are drinks that usually contain alcohol'! I cannot understand this at all... My understanding was that a Non-alcoholic beverage was a drink that doesn't contain alcohol, am I wrong? My view was to distinguish alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks, with perhaps a third category for low-alcohol / reduced alcohol drinks, and perhaps 'Mocktails' such as Virgin Mary etc. Can someone please help me make sens of this all? I'm finding it frustrating because I feel like I'm working in a vacuum without anyone to talk it over with and give me advice how to proceed. Thanks in advance. Double Happiness (talk) 12:31, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

What you seem to be trying to do is recreate Category:Non-alcoholic beverages in page form. Why? Lists like this don't really add anything encyclopedic, and the subject is far too nebulous to be able to even start to approach a comprehensive listing. Encyclopedic content doesn't just state that something exists; it describes it and gives some information on its history and place in society. My advice would be to make sure that any drinks you regard as non-aolcoholic are suitably categorised, and don't waste your time on making a worthless page.
As for you other points regarding 'what constitutes a non-alcoholic beverage', this is why Wikipedia demands verifiability. What you think doesn't matter, you need to find reliable sources that state definitions and descriptions of a non-alcoholic beverage. Find a few of these and write something about what makes a drink 'non-alcoholic', how this term is used in different cultures (all of the examples you give above have some validity, it isn't up to you to arbitrate on which is 'correct'), and how its usage has changed over time. Get rid of the list and write prose, that's the point of Wikipedia. Pyrope 13:17, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Sounds like good advice to me. Boneyard90 (talk) 13:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. Yes, you're right to say I'm trying to recreate Category:Non-alcoholic beverages in page form, I don't deny that. I wanted a starting point to explore n.a. drinks which was divided up properly rather than brands and traditional drinks being lumped together. Maybe I'm wrong but I thought Category:Non-alcoholic beverages was a list of Wikipedia pages not of drinks. That's why it contains links to such pages as Beverage Digest, surely? I see what you're saying about writing prose, I will try to follow what you are saying, but I thought indexing content is something that would be considered useful? That is really what I was trying to achieve. Double Happiness (talk) 13:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Categories are there to index content, that is their specific and sole purpose. Article pages are there to describe content. If it is notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia then it can have an article written about it and added to the correct category. That way pages can be kept tidily together and links move when pages are moved to a new name. As I said before, the topic "non-alcoholic beverage" is just too nebulous and unspecific (water? cobra blood?) to realistically make a comprehensive list. Moreover, even if one were attempted it would have to be manually kept up to date and free from vandalism/cruft/etc. Unfortunately, Wikipedia does tend to attract lots of OCD and ASS folk who seem drawn to list making. A list should only be used when the list itself is encyclopedic, not just to collate "stuff that exists". Pyrope 14:00, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for getting back to me, I'm trying to understand what you're saying, hopefully I'm learning something along the way. The bit I think I can grasp the best is: "the topic "non-alcoholic beverage" is just too nebulous and unspecific [...] to realistically make a comprehensive list" - I can totally see what you're saying there. I just think it would be nice to see brands indexed seperately from traditional drinks in some way, as this is not done in the category page, hence my edits. To be fair, the page did say it was a stub, so I hoped some attempt to expand it would be welcomed. Anyway I gather there is no deadline so I will bide my time and maybe I can do something constructive in future. cheers. Double Happiness (talk) 21:48, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
IMO it's not an unreasonable subject. We should be able to find sources that tell us, for example, how much money is spent on non-alcoholic beverages each year in different countries.
It would be an interesting place to provide a brief overview of bottled water and near-water drinks. (My local store, for example, thinks that half a liter of water with a tiny drop of peppermint extract in it is worth US $2.) It should have a section on powdered mixes like Kool-aid, another on fruit juice and the juice bars, another on coffee and chocolate drinks, and another on the rise of "diet" drinks. It would be interesting to discuss marketing of these drinks, and how it compares to the marketing of "hard" drinks as well as to tobacco. The spread of international brands (e.g., Evian water, Coca-cola) might be interesting.
I think you could easily find enough sources to write an encyclopedic article about this. The "List of" aspect is IMO the least interesting thing to include on the page, but until the rest of the article is developed, there's no harm in keeping it there. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:15, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

New article Phosphate soda

I heard that phosphates were making a comeback in a few hip niche markets, and fondly recalled visiting one of the US's few functioning phosphate soda fountains in the 1980s, so started this stub. Thought the Project might find it interesting, or want to update it with the minor comeback phosphates are making. MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:07, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Black Caviar

The usage of Black Caviar is under discussion, see Talk:Black Caviar (horse). 65.93.12.101 (talk) 04:22, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Redirects?

I am pretty new but could not find the answer. There is a talk page for Agedama, but the article is redirected to Tenkasu, so should the project just be removed from the talk page for Agedama? I would think so but wanted to check to verify first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SBHans13 (talk • contribs) 15:17, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Found my own answer. NA obviously. SBHans13 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:26, 21 April 2011 (UTC).

The late WikiProject Coca-Cola

Following the MFD Wikipedia:WikiProject Coca-Cola has now been merged into Beverages Task Force. All the project pages have now been moved to subpages of the task force and the project banner now uses {{WPFOOD}}.--Salix (talk): 09:18, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Almond paste and marzipan

Almond paste is made from ground almonds or almond meal and sugar, typically 50-55%, with a small amount of cooking oil, beaten eggs, heavy cream or corn syrup[1] added to bind the two ingredients. It is similar to marzipan but marzipan contains more sugar than almond paste, and often contains additional ingredients such as food preserves and food coloring. Almond paste has much less sugar, typically 50-55% compared to 75-85% sugar for marzipan of cheap quality. Almond paste is used as a filling in pastries, but it can also be found in chocolates and as a higher quality alternative to marzipan. In commercially manufactured almond paste, ground apricot or peach kernels are sometimes added to keep the cost down.'Italic text

this is strait form Wikipedia, telling what almond paste is. I want to clarify that it says "It is similar to marzipan" but when in fact it takes Almond paste to make Marzipan. I hope this helps.

--ChefGamer (talk) 17:05, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

de:Gebildbrot

Hi! I'm wondering if there is an adequate word/name for the German Gebildbrot? Of course, normal dictionaries will not provide such a word, since it is quite particular, kitchen English is not easy to translate ;-) Thank you for suggestions. --Schwäbin (talk) 16:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Could you provide a definition? In multiple languages there are words that have no exact translation into English but instead are best translated into an equivalent phrase or sentence. For instance, the Japanese have a single word that English has no singular equivalent but instead translates into standing at a news stand and reading a magazine without buying it. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 17:31, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought, the German article would explain what I mean... It means breads/pastries that have a special shape and are made for special occasions (Santa Clauses, Easter bunnies), but do not have modern commercialized meaning (at least not initially), but come from old traditions, like e.g. the Pretzel. --Schwäbin (talk) 17:43, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
No ideas? Is there any other talk page I could try (translator e.g.)? --Schwäbin (talk) 21:58, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Featured article review Hamlet chicken processing plant fire

I have nominated Hamlet chicken processing plant fire for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Brad (talk) 09:37, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Modernist Cuisine

I added a page on Modernist Cuisine, please read and enhance, thanks! --Stefan talk 01:55, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

It's very well sourced. I made a few changes; mostly just formatting. P. D. Cook Talk to me! 14:05, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! --Stefan talk 23:21, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Agreed, it is well-sourced. I made a few very minor formatting changes to the History section. The only portion that could benefit from an additional source is the end of paragraph #1 of the History section, which describes that "someone suggested that he should write a book." If you know of a reliable source that confirms this, it would be helpful to cite that source at the end of History paragraph 1. Based on this source (if available), you could clarify who (another chef, a columnist?) exactly it was that suggested he write the book. Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 15:58, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
I will look, I'm pretty sure that one of the refs I have states it was 'someone', I'm sure I can find the name in the forum, but that would not hold up as a RS and I'm pretty sure it was not a chef or columnist .... --Stefan talk 02:50, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

New image for Phosphate soda

A soda jerk at Franklin Fountain in Phildelphia holds up his phosphate bottle.

Just had to share this as both a fun image from yesterday, and a reminder of how tasty yesterday's phosphate soda was. It was a "Japanese thirst killer", grape juice with orgeat, angostura bitters and phosphate.[1] It's good to see this rather archaic drink ingredient still holding in there. MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:51, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

New food article

I am working on a new article for here called Spaghetti Tacos. They have become widely popular enough to have an article.

I would like to know if there is some where I can Templates for food articles or something. I have looked at other articles but could not find anything that could fit. I was thinking to put how they became about at the top. withen the show section and real world happenings or something. Any pointers for creating this type of article. Thanks please respond.Hardy Heck (talk) 14:17, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Have you got reliable sources (read that link) for this article? If not, it will be deleted. Is the subject of this article notable? If not, it will be deleted. You should probably address those concerns before worrying about layout. → ROUX ₪ 19:22, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes I do and I have like 10 or so. Hardy Heck (talk) 00:52, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

So you know I have the article started on my project page. I have one reference on the page but it is hidden for now and the rest are in the link but the are reliableHardy Heck (talk) 14:04, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

To HARDY: I don't have a specific template to recommend, but I would suggest searching and examining articles that are similar to your topic. When you find one with a format, template, or infobox that seem appropriate for your article, then go to the edit page and copy what you need to your page. It's not the best article, but take a look at Sloppy joe for an example of an infobox that might fit your article topic. Boneyard90 (talk) 14:50, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
To ROUX: I suggest you read this link. - Boneyard90 (talk) 14:51, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello Heck, I would be more than willing to help you with that article. I left a note on your talk page. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 17:10, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Boneyard, I was trying to prevent exactly that from happening, in fact, so your link given to someone who has been here rather longer than you have is somewhat misplaced. → ROUX ₪ 18:43, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Whatever the intent, your reply didn't answer the question, so therefore wasn't helpful. No need for a contest on who's been here the longest, just called it like I saw it. Boneyard90 (talk) 19:17, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Well, to be honest although I occasionally watch iCarly with my 11 year old (German version), I had absolutely no clue about Spaghetti Tacos (he asked for tacos recently though, but we cooked classical ones). So I was really surprised when I saw the first hit in Google: Helene Stapinski (2010-10-05). "Spaghetti Tacos: Silly Enough for Young Eaters". New York Times..
My tip of the day is to use (just copy/paste): <ref name="NYT2010">{{Cite news|title=Spaghetti Tacos: Silly Enough for Young Eaters |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/dining/06tacos.html |journal=New York Times |date=2010-10-05 |author=Helene Stapinski}}</ref> the first time you refer to the article, then: <ref name="NYT2010"/> for the next occurrences. At the end of the article put: <references/> to get footnotes. If you find it difficult, don't hesitate to ask for support. --Anneyh (talk) 20:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks I willHardy Heck (talk) 20:58, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

proposed Diet Pepsi article revision -- thoughts?

As the Diet Pepsi article is lacking in reliable sources and does not currently live up to the content guidelines in the manual of style, I drafted up a proposed update in my user sandbox--with a focus on bringing the article closer to the Good Article criteria.

An inquiry on the article's Talk page explains a bit more of the background detail. Would anyone be able to take a peek at the draft update, and share your thoughts on whether it is ready to be implemented? I feel that it would be significant improvement, but given the depth of the content, it could certainly benefit from a fresh set of eyes or two. Please feel free to respond directly here, on the article's Talk page, or if you prefer you're welcome to jump in and make edits directly to my userspace draft. Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 18:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Acmella oleracea Wikipedia page

The structure shown for spilanthol is incorrect and should be replaced with the correct structure. The structure shown is for Undeca-2E,7Z,9E-trienoic_acid_isobutylamide.

Spilanthol is (2E,6Z,8E)-deca-2,6,8-trienoic acid N-isobutyl amide. The structure shown has one extra carbon and therefore the double bonds are in the wrong places.Rbcody (talk) 21:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I'll take your word on this because I honestly would not be able to even begin to understand the chemical formulas that you are referring to. However I can say that the image you are referring to, File:Undeca-2E,7Z,9E-trienoic acid isobutylamide.gif, was created by User:Nubinski. I might suggest contacting him and having him update the image, or may I also suggest contacting the Chemistry Project for assistance in correcting the faulty image. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 08:49, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Guarana

Just a heads-up; Guarana has had a GAR open for over a month and nobody's commented yet. Please feel free to do so here. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 21:46, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Purple yam

I've requested the article Purple yam be moved over redir to Dioscorea alata. Please weigh in at the talk page. I am leaving this message at all the relevant project's talk pages. Hamamelis (talk) 13:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

The article has been moved, as above, with 5 votes in support; 0 votes opposed. Thanks everyone for your participation. I am leaving this message at all the relevant project's talk pages. Hamamelis (talk) 10:41, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Philippine cuisine in the United States

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines#section idea. I have begun a discussion that members of this WikiProject maybe interested in joining. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:52, 30 May 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})

E number

There is an attempt at E number to remove information about food additives that are no longer approved in the EU from the list. If anyone is interested, please contribute to the discussion at Talk:E_number#True_E-numbers. Deli nk (talk) 12:49, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Featured Article nomination - Everything Tastes Better with Bacon

Hey all. I've nominated Everything Tastes Better with Bacon for consideration as a candidate to Featured Article quality status. If you don't mind taking a look, comments would be welcome! Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 20:18, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

image:Nathan's Famous at Coney Island, NY IMG 1264.JPG

file:Nathan's Famous at Coney Island, NY IMG 1264.JPG has been nominated for deletion. 65.94.45.185 (talk) 04:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Where can one find fresh pearl onions?

My husband and I were wondering where you can find fresh pearl onions. He wanted to try his hand at pickling them. I know you can find jars of them in the super markets, but they are precooked. I'd hate to have to try and find someone in Europe to ship them to me :)


173.24.93.33 (talk) 06:38, 11 June 2011 (UTC)Michelle Lynam

check your local supermarket's produce section. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:35, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, if you're in North America, they're usually sold in 1lb/454g to 2lb/1kg mesh bags where garlic and onions are in your local supermarket. Usually sold with the skin on; to remove, bring water almost to a boil, drop all onions in. This will loosen the skin. With a paring knife, nip off the tip of the onion and scrape off the peel. Then proceed to your pickling. As always, ensure that whatever vessel you're planning to store them in is properly sterilised etc. → ROUX ₪ 15:50, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
They are an important part of Julia Child's boeuf bourguignon recipe, and damn, is it good stuff. My wife bought them at the local Stop & Shop/Giant here on the east coast of the US. Getting my wife Mastering the Art of French Cooking was a smart move on my part...
It also required the purchase of several new cookware items, get the good stuff when you buy it it. The money used up front on good cast-iron cookware is money well spent. We went with Lodge, while my brother the chef uses Le Creuset. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 18:23, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
I (chef) adore Creuset, but for really good cast iron you want to visit garage sales. Find something that someone has been using for 50 years.. it'll have a patina to make the gods themselves weep. → ROUX ₪ 06:03, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
We have two pieces of early 50's & 60's era Cast iron, one that belonged to my grandmother and one that belonged to her father. Her father was a food scientist with Libby's and later the US Government, specifically Natick Labs. He worked on the development of meat components of MRE's and had several patents for food preservation and canning. His pan is a shallow, round griddle and doesn't even need oil any more. My grandmother was a mid-fifties American housewife and cooked like one, however her pan was high sided fry pan used for decades to fry just about anything and everything. We've added a square cast iron grill pan and an enameled dutch oven. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:47, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Food Network Challenge

I just wanted to bring this article to the Wikiproject's attention. It's already tagged for Wikiproject Television but I also took the liberty of adding a food and drink tab since it relates to food and drink. If someone gets the chance and could take a look at it I'd appreciate it. I'm slowly (very slowly) trying to rehab it a little bit and expand it but due to lack of time and being able to find resource to source from it's going slowly. Any extra eyes would be appreciated. Thanks. Cat-five - talk 07:50, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon - copyediting help

Hey all - this article is currently at FAC, where it's been suggested to get some additional copyediting help to improve prose. I'd really appreciate any assistance, if anyone's willing to pitch in a bit. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 04:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to the Bacon Challenge 2012

Hi all - considering that you are all interested in food in one way or another, you may be interested in participating in the Bacon Challenge 2012. The Bacon Challenge is an annual celebration of bacon on Wikipedia in which editors come together to help create, expand, and improve Wikipedia's coverage of bacon. It's open to everyone and lasts for more than half a year, giving participants plenty of time to work as they please. A fun part of the Challenge is the Bacon WikiCup, an event in which editors score points for their contributions and compete to get the most points in a friendly, productive competition. The winner walks away with a trophy, top contributors in certain categories get barnstars, and all participants receive a participation medal (though the ultimate goal is to have fun and help Wikipedia, of course). The Challenge is just starting, so now would be the best time to sign up.

I could write more, but I wouldn't want to write a big wall of text. If you think you're interested, please check out the links in my post to learn more, and sign up here if you wish. Also, if you think you know anyone else that might be interested in this, feel free to let them know. Thanks for reading, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Raw food does not an ism make

If someone prefers to eat their strawberries raw, that does not make them a raw foodist. Raw foodism is a cult-like lifestyle in which cooking food is considered almost evil, but most people who have no qualms in having their food baked or fried regularly also consume raw foods. Therefore I find it curious, and actually somewhat annoying, that "raw", in food-related articles, often links to Raw foodism, as in the lead of the Gazpacho article: "Gazpacho is a cold Spanish tomato-based raw vegetable soup". After all, "vegetable" does not Easter-egg out to Veganism, and so on, so why relate conventional rawness of some food to this cult thing? Note also that Raw food redirects to Raw foodism, and that Category:Raw foods is a subcategory of Category:Raw foodism instead of the other way around. What do others think?  --Lambiam 10:54, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Food_and_drink/Archive_18&oldid=1238756606"