Talk:Chili pepper

AJI

Aji word is better than Chile, not to be confused with the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Albedu (talk • contribs) 19:21, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Chili vs non-chili peppers

It appears some people are confused because they are focusing on whether or not the plant has a hot taste. There are two main groups of capsicum plants: one have a 'hot' taste and are commonly referred to as "chili" and the other are a group of plants that are not hot to taste and include sweet peppers, bell peppers and capsicum in Australasia. The key issue here is that these are all varieties of the same plant and therefore should be included in one Wikipedia article with appropriate descriptions. The difference in taste is caused by the level of the natural chemicals in these plants that cause a burning sensation when consumed. Even sweet peppers or bell peppers have trace amounts of this chemical.

Chile spelled with an "e" is a place, not a plant.

Actually, "chile" is common amongst Spanish speakers specifically in Mexico. Chilli is used by English speakers, in Australia, India, Indonesia and Southeast Asia in general, for the pungent types whereas the mild ones are called capsicums. Chile is also included and recognized in dictionaries. User:pep589 —Preceding comment was added at 11:39, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Smoking of Seeds

Just roll the seeds up with tobacco in a joint. Causes Euphoria but a deep burning sensation in your lungs. Still, excellent if you want to have a laugh :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.23.202.143 (talk) 15:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

That's a great way to cause serious, permanent respiratory damage to your lungs. Thanks for that piece of useless, dangerous information. --Jsderwin (talk) 06:35, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Every pepper is NOT chilli

It's quite obvious that this article is US-centred, there is nowhere in Europe that the sweet peppers are called chilli. Chilli are EXCLUSIVELY the hot varieties, it took me many readings to clarify my confusion and I think I speak on behalf of all Europeans.

Certainly you jest. Why are so many people so intent to use words in the least logical manner conceivable? 82.135.82.212 23:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

If this article were US centric as you say, then the correct spelling 'chile' would be used. That's because here in the New World, where the chile is a native plant, that's how it's spelled. Additionally, you are wrong. Every pepper is a chile. They have been genetically modified to be sweet without any capsicum.--Jsderwin (talk) 06:37, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Capsicum anuum

How do we handle the fact that jalapenos and bell pepers are both Capsicum Annuum? No one I think would call bell peppers chiles. Rmhermen 06:45 Aug 21, 2002 (PDT)

In Latin American cooking, there's a dish called "chile relleno" (stuffed chile) which uses a chile pod that is almost the size of a bell pepper, and not appreciably hotter. It's a stretch... but...  ;) -- Tooki 21:39, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It'd make more sense to call it chili than to call it pepper. But who cares, eh? 82.135.82.212 23:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

New or Old World

Is the statement "the plant was unknown in Asia until Europeans introduced it there"? I have a source that says it has been grown in there for "thousands of years" wich seems to predate Columbus. I have also read about seeds of Capsicum frutecens from the 15th century being found in Lund. Also some roman texts may refer to chili peppers. // Liftarn

Your source is mistaken, the entire nightshade family is native to the new world only. Mkweise 23:26, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Not so. While it's true that most economically-useful members of the Solanaceae, or nightshade family, are native to the Americas, there are some species that are not, such as: deadly nightshade, or belladona (Atropa belladonna), which is native to Europe, N Africa and W Asia; and the aubergine (Solanum melongena), which is native to southern India and Sri Lanka. Jimmy Pitt 16:44, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Photo of Haberenos

Re: the second photo - I don't think these are Haberenos. They are known as "hot peppers" and were sold at a caribbean market in London. From looking at the external link they are either Jamaican or Scotch Bonnet. Anyone could at identifying chillis? Secretlondon 22:47, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The peppers in your photo have the classic lantern shape of Habaneros, not the more bunched-up bonnet shape of Scotch bonnets. The Jamaican pepper shown in your link above looks very similar to a Habanero to me - I'd have to smell or taste a pepper to identify it beyond any doubt. Habanero peppers have a distinct citrus-like aroma that no other pepper shares. Mkweise 23:26, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

P.S. Habaneros are originally from Cuba, not Mexico. Mkweise 23:56, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter. The scotch bonnet is a cultivar of the habanero. Digsdirt 23:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

RE: Wrongly Deleted Article

For the numerous reasons outlined in great detail in my posts of Sept. and Oct. of this year on the discussion page for Capsicum, I have restored this wrongly deleted article.

I will also go through the edits made subsequent to the merger and am re-applying them to both articles, in order to make sure that no changes are lost. --Hotpeppers 02:17, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Applied Latest Updates:

The following changes were made elsewhere to the contents of this article after it was deleted, and have been re-applied -

Update by Taxman on Aug 19 listed as "noted complimentary effect of a chemical on birds".

Applicable portions of update by Tooki on Aug. 26 listed as "minor cleanup".

The update by Bobierto on Sept. 5 listed as "habaneros and Scotch bonnets are the same thing!", which was based on the premise that the article was in error, was not re-applied, for the simple reason that the premise was incorrect, and applying this change would have made the article inaccurate. --Hotpeppers 05:57, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

chile pepper and capsicum

If this article is going to talk about the fruits, and the capsicum about the plants, then this one needs to lose its sections about the species, excessive talk of capsaicin, and whatnot. --Joy [shallot] 15:03, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"Medical Usage" moved here

I have moved the following whole "Medical Usage" paragraph which was added by Aragorn2 (diff). It contains speculations, unproven hypotheses, and wrong facts. Moreover, not a single reference is given and I could not verify most claims. Cacycle 21:54, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

---

In the West, it was long believed that excessive consumption of hot peppers could cause stomach ulcers. This was in accordance with the hypothesis that ulcers were caused by stress, and irritation of the stomach lining.

More lately, however, studies have shown that hot chile consumption is, on the contrary, negatively correlated with the incidence of stomach ulcers. For example, this ailment is less common in southern India than in the North of the country. In the South, dishes traditionally contain more hot peppers, probably to help preserve food in the tropical climate. Another study performed on 103 Chinese patients, some of which had stomach ulcers and some which had not, showed that the ulcer-free patients, on the average, consumed hot chiles three times as often as those who had ulcers (24 vs. 8 times a month). Also, some Native American tribes have been reported to treat stomach pains (often caused by ulcers) with increasing amounts of raw, hot peppers.

The relatively recent discovery of the bacterium Helicobacter pylori offers a possible explanation for this effect: The capsaicin with its antibacterial properties could, when ingested regularily in sufficient doses, limit the population of this species (which is now suspected to be responsible for the great majority of all ulcers) in the human stomach.

While chiles as a cure for ulcers are still used only in traditional medicine, Western medicine has adopted pepper extracts containing capsaicinoids for a couple of other uses. For example, chronical pain is sometimes treated using highly concentrated oleoresin capsicum: The corresponding body part is locally anesthetized, then oleoresin capsicum is applied. As soon as the anesthesia wears off, and the patient notices a warming sensation, the oleoresin is carefully removed from the skin. After this treatment, the patient is usually pain-free for several days. (This treatment uses OC to deplete substance P and thus temporarily inhibit transmission of pain signals.)

The warming sensation and (in the mid term) pain-stilling effects of capsaicinoids are also used in heat plasters and ointments to treat muscular tensions and arthrosis. The former treatment works two-fold. First, the apparent heat directly causes the affected muscles to relax (in the same way that hot baths and sauna visits do). Second, the pain associated with tensions is, after the initial pain caused by the apparent heat, stilled, which interrupts a well-known feedback cycle (muscular pain leads to tension, which leads to more pain).

Arthrosis symptoms can be alleviated using the same preparations, however, it was even reported that local application of capsaicinoids can reduce wear of the cartilage by stimulating lubrication on the inside of the joint capsule.

All that said, it should be noted that safety precautions must be taken when handling substances high in capsaicinoids. Capsicum extracts must never be applied to open sores, mucuous membranes, or the thin sensitive skin of (for example) the scrotum and the labia. Be careful not to rub your eyes after applying capsicum creams, or handling hot chiles, unless you carefully washed your hands in the meantime. First aid procedures include carefully washing the capsaicin away with cold water and soap (capsaicinoids are hydrophobic), or, if the eyes are affected, rinsing with cold water for a prolonged period of time. In the latter case, see a doctor once the initial symptoms diminuish. An ice package may help on the way to the hospital rsp. the doctor's practice.

If very hot substances have been ingested, cool and fatty foods rsp. drinks soothe best, for example ice cream, milk (including soy milk). Avocados and guacamole, peanut butter, and, strangely enough, some foods low in fat such as cucumber are also reported to take the heat away reliably.

---

Cayenne: baccatum vs frutescens

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cayenne_pepper classifies the cayenne variety under capsicum baccatum, while

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile_pepper classifies is under capsicum frutescens. Which of these is correct?

Hello....... I'm hoping this is the proper way to answer the above query. Cayenne is neither baccatum or frutescens. It is Capsicum Annuum. The C. Baccatum are mainly the "Aji" varieties of South America, and the Frutescens varieties that are most commonly known are the Tabasco and Malagueta peppers.

note by JB: there is an inconsistency in the wiki re which species Cayenne is, viz:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chili_pepper

says:

Capsicum frutescens, which includes the cayenne and tabasco peppers

but:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_capsicum_cultivars

says that Capsicum annuum includes cayenne.

Which is correct? I think the latter but I am no expert. In any case, someone should check and fix it, else wiki contains a glaring inconsistency.

67.142.130.45 19:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Antibacterial properties

Is there any substantiation of the claim that chili peppers have an antibacterial property? The lonely planet series of guides claims otherwise.

I removed the passage:

Capsaicin has an antibacterial effect, so food cooked with chiles keeps for longer without spoiling.

128.104.102.203 00:14, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I have heard from a number of people that they are anti-bacterial.

I am unusually busy though. Is anyone interested in researching for citations on this?

Thanks! Phil

65.101.251.116 (talk) 19:27, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Dorset Chilli - Apr 1st Joke?

As of April 2006 a report has been made of the Dorset Naga, a variety of the Naga Jolokia pepper cultivated exclusively by the Peppers by Post company in Dorset, England. They claim a lab used by the American Spice Trade Association measured their pepper at 923,000 SHU

I would take this with a pinch of salt (the reference not the chilli), as it is from the April 1. It has certainly been taken as serious by other papers, but I have not found a report before this date. -- Chris Q 12:51, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

After more research I now think it is a real, but yet unverified claim and not a joke -- 88.105.81.183 17:41, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

A more recent reference is in the April 2007 edition of "The Garden" (The Royal Horticultural Society's magazine) which notes the Peppers by Post people, and they says you can buy the seeds here [3]. If the RHS still thinks it is real, I tend to believe them. Patche99z 15:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move, of course. —Nightstallion (?) 08:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Requested move (2006)

Chile Pepper → Chili Pepper: Chili is by far the most common spelling - see Google hits:

"chili pepper": 2,450,000

"chile pepper": 582,000

"chilli pepper": 392,000

— SteveRwanda 14:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support I had not even come across the spelling "chile pepper", and thought it would rhyme with smile. I would also support chilli pepper. -- Chris Q
• Spport i.e. "Chili" On overwhelming usage grounds - origin of word is fine but this language thing is dynamic albeit needing some basis. :: Kevinalewis : ^{(Talk Page)}/_(Desk) 16:00, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support - would actually prefer chilli pepper too, as prior to today I had never heard of chile or chili, but it does seem from the hits above that the single L form takes precedence. — SteveRwanda 16:50, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support to either option. David Kernow 18:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong support not necessarily of Chile; current title is slightly confusing. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 04:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support. Chili pepper seems to be the most common term, and "Chile pepper" might be ambiguous in context of the nation of that name (and the peppers thereof). -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 21:10, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support as per [4] ~ trialsanderrors 08:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments

Personally I prefer Chilli pepper -- nirvana2013 14:55, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Heat Ranking

I've seen articles elsewhere on the 'heat ranking' of various varieties of Chilli, should there be an article on this in Wikipedia? I think so! :o) Anyone want to create one? --Gavinio 09:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

D'oh! I was thinking of the scoville scale! It's already there... Sorry about that. Gavinio

Capsicum from Capsaicin (chemical)

Chili from our daily conversation but Capsicum from Capsaicin (chemical), capsaicin is: 8-methyl-N-vanillyl-6-nonenamide.

"Species and cultivars" error.......

Under the above heading, Cayenne peppers are incorrectly listed under Capsicum Frutescens. It is in fact Capsicum Annuum. The only relatively common Frutescens varieties are the Tabasco and Malagueta peppers.64.12.116.199 13:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Parasites

Interesting thought the reference (http://www.discover.com/issues/sep-00/departments/featbiology/) is, we could really do with something with a little more, er.. meat. Rich Farmbrough, 12:00 16 January 2007 (GMT).

Too Long

Ok, at some point a line needs to be drawn:

"The chili pepper, chile pepper or chilli pepper, or simply chili, chile or chilli,"

Should a line be drawn - that would cross it.--Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 23:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

There we go - great job! --Daniel()Folsom ^T|_C|^U 03:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Precolumbian chili in Europe

I have some sources for precolumbian use of chili in Europe. Should I add it under the history section? // Liftarn

If they are reliable sources, go ahead. :) --Monotonehell 18:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Are cookbooks reliable sources? I think it was in Eat the heat or perhaps Arctic heat. I'll have to check. It's quite interesting. A Capsicum frutescens was found in a layer from the 15th century (in Lund I think). And there was some description from ancient Greece that described pepper, but the description seemed to indicate chili rather than pepper (or it may be Piper longum (my speculation)). // Liftarn

Sounds a bit out there, how reliable are the sources? --Monotonehell 11:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

It's from the introduction of a cookbook so it's probably not the best source. I'll have to find the book to see if they are refering to another source. // Liftarn

Ok, I've checked and the original source is an article in Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift. // Liftarn

And now I've added a section on it. // Liftarn

It IS a bit out there. While the claim was actually made as recited by the cookbook, the claim itself is not accepted as credible by virtually all ethnobotanists. Tmangray 00:01, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Not a Maldive native

Flora of Maldives page staes quite clearly that it is for plants growing as natives. This species is not native to the Maldives. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ethel Aardvark (talk • contribs) 22:57 UTC, 13 June 2007.

Merge notices

It looks like this page gets a merge notice slapped on it from time to time. I'd like to just say that there's a clear need for this article, independent of any biology/botany article about the various [List of capsicum cultivars|capsicum cultivars]. Chili peppers are a cooking ingredient and the source of various folk and modern medicines. Having an article about those broad uses and the cultural elements that have grown around them makes sense. Right now, the linkage between these articles seems to be clear and easy to navigate, so if someone wants to propose a merge, they should probably start by proposing how navigation will flow after they're done, and why the culinary/cultural elements don't merit a stand-alone article. -Harmil 15:45, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd agree, there's a good model in the Vitis, Vitis vinifera and Grape articles, which are all under the Plants Project - the first two are largely focussed on the botany, the latter goes into more commercial aspects. Then you have a whole series of articles devoted to the individual domesticated varieties such as Pinot Noir and Sauvignon Blanc, which are not part of the Plants Project but part of the Food and Drink Project (under the Wine sub-project in fact).

In the case of the peppers, there's a lot of little articles about individual varieties, which I suspect will never amount to much more than stubs - particularly if most of the botany is taken care of in the main Capsicum/Capsicum frutescens articles. So in this case I'm minded to be a 'lumper' rather than a 'splitter' when it comes to the individual varieties of chili - I see an article about them that is more than a simple list, with articles on individual chili varieties being splintered as necessary - I imagine something like birds-eye will already have enough to justify an article, but there seem to be a lot of stubs out there.

If you want to reduce the merge tendencies, then like the grape/V. vinifera articles, it probably needs a bit of work to push the two articles in different directions, C. frutescens on the biology, and this one on the cultural and cuisine aspects. FlagSteward 11:58, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Apparent Contradiction

From the page:

Chile is the American spelling (uncommon elsewhere) which refers specifically to this plant and its fruit. This orthography is common in much of the Spanish-speaking world,

These statements seem contradictory. How can it be uncommon outside America, yet common in much of the Spanish-speaking world? I suspect that the orthography statement originally applied to 'chili', rather than to 'chile', but got mis-shuffled during merging and unmerging, so I've moved it there.

I also find the use of the definite article in 'the American spelling' obnoxiously arbitrary, since many Americans refuse to spell it that way, so I've replaced it with the indefinite article. Downstrike

This is because 'America' = North America, Central America & South America. Specially to Latin Americans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.102.44 (talk) 03:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Dubious Original Romanization

The original Romanization of the Náhuatl word was done by Spaniards, not Englishmen. Had they Romanized it as 'chilli', it would be pronounced as 'chiyey', instead of 'chilly'. (Has anyone heard it pronounced that way?) Further, although the web page cited here does spell the word as 'chilli', it doesn't seem to make any assertion about the original Romanization. Downstrike

double ll was not pronounced as y in 15th century spanish - it was pronounced as ly as it is today in castile. But the double ll in nahuatl words reflect and actual double l sound - because nahuatl differ from spanish in distinguisging single l's from double l's. The spanish monks who alphabetisised nahuatl realised that this was different from spanish and the most observant of them did write it chilli and pronounce it as a double ll. Whereas laymen spaniards wrote it with a single l and pronounced it with a single l. This is the origin of the two different orthographies chilli/chili.·Maunus· ·ƛ· 10:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

"Sport pepper" redirect

"Sport pepper" redirects to this page, but I believe it should redirect to "Serrano pepper" instead based on this page:

http://www.hotdogchicagostyle.com/faq.php 12.48.196.9 (talk) 19:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Nahuatl has for its absolute case 'atl' or, after a consonant, ' tli', as in ahuacatl; xtomatl; chocolatl; atlatl; therefore, could it not have been 'chil-tli' that ended up as 'chilli' thence 'chili' & romanised by th spanish into 'chile: which is the name of a country, not a fruit. 203.61.121.136 (talk) 04:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

The "Name in other languages" section - Proposed deletion

Having added to this section I wonder whether its is justified, you could add this to many wikipedia entries. The article already has the scientific name and the names used in English-speaking countries. I propose that this section be deleted —Preceding unsigned comment added by Q Chris (talk • contribs) 10:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I second its deletion. Translations belong in dictionaries not in enccyclopedia articles. And it is a completely random sample of languages - and the list can never be considered complete. I delete it right away.·Maunus· ·ƛ· 10:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Guajillo article needed

The guajillo chile is one of the most important in Mexican cuisine--an article about this chile is needed immediately. Badagnani (talk) 23:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. Badagnani (talk) 03:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

More on naming

I'm from the UK. I have to disagree with what the article says: The mild larger types are called bell pepper in the United States, Canada (and sometimes the United Kingdom), sweet pepper in Britain and Ireland - um, not really. I very, very, very rarely hear them called sweet peppers and have never heard them called bell peppers - they're just called peppers, either red peppers, green peppers or the less common yellow and orange ones. And as for the hot ones - well, over here in my neck of the woods the hot fruit are simply called chillis, not chilli peppers (perhaps so as not to confuse with chilli pepper, which is the ground powder from the hot fruit that you put in your chilli dish.) I expect all this is clear as mud, but I wanted to put it straight. I'm not really arsed whether it's spelled with one l or two.86.147.162.237 (talk) 15:39, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Taxonomic chart

Why is there no botanical taxonomic chart as there is with other plants? Caeruleancentaur (talk) 16:35, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

External link with lots of recipes

This external link was removed, but I checked it out and it seems like it would be good to include. http://www.platinumrecipescollection.com/chilli/ ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

No, WP is not a collection of links, and especially not to sites that are ad farms. ► RATEL ◄ 06:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Super Chili

I believe many people own a plant from a local gardening store that is called something like 'an ornamental hybrid' or 'super chili' or some such thing. Could one of you experts not figure out how to write an article on this cultivar? I believe that it is a hybrid or mutant cayenne.--137.186.217.73 (talk) 19:51, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

ahh...

The "fact" about 1 in every 400 peppers being used to smuggle drugs has been removed for 1. being uncited and 2. being more appropriate on a page dealing with smuggling. --Wilson (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Google Is a Poor Way to Define Spelling

To define the spelling of chiles based upon Google entries is like defining the proper role of women in society based upon Google entries. In the majority of culinary texts and as taught in culinary schools around the world, you will find a consensus that the word is spelled "chile" when talking about the ingredient and "chili" when talking about the stew made with the ingredient. After all, one of the most commonly misspelled words in the English language is "to" in one of its forms. All too often we see people use one of the wrong two spellings when they mean to use the proper spelling. It's a case of mistaken context. Are we to alter the usage of the word simply because Google statistics shows one of the three spellings to be more common? I think not. The word is "chile" not "chili." I find the dependence upon Google statistics for definitive spellings to be disheartening, to say the least. Kemkerj (talk) 01:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Runny Nose??

I'm aware of several people that suffer from a runny nose after eating food which contains the spicy capsaicin-based red chili pepper and this is backed up by a few web searches. If this is a common occurrence, shouldn't it be noted in the article along with the sweating side effect? 194.46.189.240 (talk) 20:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

"A high consumption of chili is associated with stomach cancer" Enforcement as a statement of fact

I recently made a simple change to this statement from " A high consumption of chili is associated with stomach cancer" to " A high consumption of chili may be associated with stomach cancer" as there is no solid unarguable evidence that this is defaintely the case. (see links below and a million others you can find with a google search that argue otherwise).

http://www.zhion.com/herb/Pepper.html http://chilli-willy.com/health-benefits-of-eating-chillies.html

"The incidence of stomach and colon cancer is far lower in South America, where they eat far more Chilli than they do in the North.

Scientists have also found that Capsaicin inhibits cancer cell growth. "

I changed the wording in the article to make it less of a definate statement of absolute fact BUT it was reverted back. Why?

I've changed it back again. Please discuss here the reasons you think it should be otherwise. Thank you Danno81 (talk) 11:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

We use scientific studies, not commercial webpages, as sources when inserting scientific information. The studies cited show that there is an association between high cap. consumption and cancer, not that there "may be". ► RATEL ◄ 13:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, lets take the 4 references you're refering to attached to that statement in the main article:

Ref 40 - Chili pepper consumption might be an independent determinant of GC in Mexico. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc. - "Might", not "Is"

Ref 41 - The cancer increase was dependent on the concentration of these groups in a county. These results strengthen and extend an earlier case-control study which found odds ratios above 5 for the stomach cancer association with capsaicin pepper. It is further evidence that capsaicin is a human carcinogen. Further evidence, but not fully conclusive.

Ref 42 - However, when consumption was measured as frequency per day, a significant trend among consumers was not observed. Multivariable adjustment increased the magnitude of the chili pepper-gastric cancer association, but a significant trend among consumers (measured as frequency per day) was still not observed. Chili pepper consumption may be a strong risk factor for gastric cancer, but further studies are needed to test this hypothesis. "May be" not "is"

It would go against the scientific method if we use this as definitive confirmation. We can say "May Be" but not "Is". Also note that only taking studies that show a positive increase and ignoring the rest even if they show evidence but draw a possible, not definitive conclusion will constitute a form of publication bias. The wording should stay as "may be" and not a conclusive "Is". Danno81 (talk) 08:40, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Fruit or Vegetable?

The article states that chili peppers are a "fruit" of the whatever genus. Then, later it says that they are commonly "used as a vegetable". Does anyone know if they are technically a fruit or a vegetable? Thanks! Deepfryer99 (talk) 02:45, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Both. Cacycle (talk) 05:10, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

All fruits are vegetables. If you want to be more folksy and less scientific I guess chili is neither a classic fruit nor vegetable, it is a spice. Carewolf (talk) 19:40, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

After reading this entire Capsicum (I'll attempt to circumvent the 'chili, chilli, chile bitchfest) article, I really wonder who let high schoolers edit it. Articles such as this is why Wikipedia will never be taken seriously by academia. Having said that, by definition a fruit is a ripened ovary while a vegetable is other flesh of the plant. Since the 'pepper' part of the plant is the result of fertilized flowers, or ie they are the ripened ovaries of the vegetable of the main plant. Thus, the 'pepper' is the fruit. It IS the ovary in which contains the seed. The rest of the plant is the vegetable. When the fruit is dried and converted to powdered form, then it is a spice. How a plant is cooked really has nothing to do with its classification as a fruit or vegetable, but more on how it is treated. ie, it is cooked like a vegetable or eaten like a fruit. But being used 'as if' or 'like' does not make it 'be.' An aircraft may 'fly like a bird' but does not make it a bird, although some slang does refer to aircraft as 'birds.' One could argue that the flesh of the fruit could make it a vegetable. The same argument could also be used on an Apple, which is just flesh surrounding the fruit. But that is dismissing the definition completely. Again, the flesh of the fruit IS the ovary. An ovary contains seeds, whether fertilized or not. A ripened ovary IS the fruit. The roots, leaves, flowers, and stem are all parts of the vegetable. Hence why tubers (ie, potatoes) are vegetables. The 'traditional' argument could also be made. But ignorance isn't a reason to continue ignorance. Traditionally, many people were not as well educated as they are today. Spices are the dried form of fruits and vegetables. Although the fruit can be cut up to 'spice' up a recipe, that does not make it a spice, but 'used LIKE a spice.' Again with the 'like.' In spice form, fruits and vegetables can be stored longer, transported easier, and reduce storage space required. In summarization, the 'pepper' or 'chili, chilli, chile, etc' is the fruit. In dried form it is a spice. Usually the vegetable part of the plant is not consumed. And Wikipedia should be used to further correct information and not folklore or ignorance. TheePepper (talk) 10:05, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

growing chili peppers

The article about Chili peppers is full of useful information however I feel it could be made better with some information on growing them as this seems to be getting very popular, I have searched myself many sites looking for good information and the page would benefit from having at least an external link.

http://gomestic.com/gardening/guide-to-growing-chili-peppers/

Stuart747 (talk) 20:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Please stop spamming this link. --4wajzkd02 (talk) 14:04, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Requested move (2010)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Chili pepper → Chile pepper — It is profoundly ridiculous that this page exists, and persists to exist under the improper spelling. Chili is a westernized corruption of the word and best used to refer to the southern dish. Experts such as Dr. Bosland, who is recognized internationally as one of the foremost experts on Capsicum, and furthermore the director of the Chile Pepper Institute at New Mexico State University, as well as specialists in culinary arts and botany all agree the proper spelling is Chile. This is the English Wikipedia, not the American Wikipedia, so the spelling should reflect the most commonly accepted spelling in the English Language: which is Chile. I recommend a permanent move to 'Chile Pepper', with redirects from 'Chili', and an explanation of the name controversy being added to the head of the article. JovBlackheart (talk) 16:46, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

• Looks like this debate will not end. I think it is logical to use the spelling of the regular users of the fruit / vegetable than debating over English or British. South Asians are the common users of hot varieties of Chili and it is spelt as Chili in India, Pakistan and British Commonwealth countries. North Americans rarely use pungent and hot spices and the varieties of capsicum used in America are the bell peppers and the likes of Jalapenos. So I suggest moving to plain Chili instead of Chili peppers or Chile peppers. rams81 (talk) 17:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
• I'd like to see some proof, please, that "chile" is "the most commonly accepted spelling in the English Language" The Google hit data cited above seems to indicate otherwise. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
• "North Americans rarely use pungent and hot spices and the varieties of capsicum used in America are the bell peppers and the likes of Jalapenos" - got some proof of that, or is that your opinion? Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
• oppose This is not the epicurean Wikipedia, this is the English Wikipedia. [5][6] Clear WP:UCN from Google News also... [7][8] - infact, Google News suggests spelling it as "chili pepper", since it thinks "chile pepper" is not the right search term. 65.94.253.16 (talk) 05:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
• strong oppose The phrasing of the suggestion suggests why. "Profoundly ridiculous" is WP:PEACOCK. Dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive. I.e., they explain usage as it exists and has been. (Read the explanatory material in the front of Websters or the OED.) The idea that something "should be" spelled in a certain way demonstrates, not only a misunderstanding of how written language is used, but also doesn't take in account that modern search engines can handle a variety of spellings without problem. There is no theoretical or practical reason to change the article spelling. Piano non troppo (talk) 09:03, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
• Strong oppose: Per WP:COMMONNAME on the English Wikipedia. – ukexpat (talk) 16:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose - No proof having been given of the claims made. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose This has been discussed numerous times, please read the archives. Beside that, it simply does not matter and it would be very disruptive to move this article every few weeks due to someone's personal preferences, please read Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Retaining the existing variety. Redirects are in place and the etymology and all existing variants are discussed in the article. Please let's get some real and productive work done here. Cacycle (talk) 09:29, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

You omitted your Edit Summary sentiment, which drew an amused chuckle from me! Piano non troppo (talk) 09:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose Chili is the common spelling, even in the United Kingdom. Wikipedia deals with what is, not with what you may prefer it to be. Skinsmoke (talk) 14:40, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose - Standard usage should prevail. Jusdafax 15:35, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
• Oppose per UCN. Flamarande (talk) 21:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Catalog of scientific findings

I've removed a considerable amount of cited material, some of which may be appropriate, but which in context was nothing much more than a list of scientific papers and theories on the subject.[9]

Wikipedia is not a linkfarm, nor a cross-reference to every paper published on a topic. Adding huge amounts of material that summarize recent papers is problematic in that it forms no coherent narrative, and is unlikely to be read by most readers.

Discussion is invited on what should be included. Piano non troppo (talk) 09:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

1. That's not an exhaustive list of research on the topic, just a selection of the most interesting. And it's "findings", not "theories".
2. I find it more informative to include it than to remove it
3. It does not fit the definition of a linkfarm
4. Not all sections need to be narratives. Bulleted points are sometimes appropriate

► RATEL ◄ 01:32, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Yep. No problem with bulleted items. They are probably under-used in Wiki, and over-used in business meetings. Bulleted points present some peculiar compositional difficulties, and not everybody is as unfortuate as I am, having had to create a three hour PowerPoint presentation. (There's a recent paper I could find, whose findings suggest that most bulleted PowerPoint presentations do not improve audience retention.)

Looking at the chili references, my guess was that I would be interested in reading most of them. So the question here is avoiding the "linkfarm effect". If there are thousands of papers on a topic, only some will be included in Wikipedia. How is a selection of them to be made? Before that is answered here in specific detail, the "Wiki question" is: Why can't that material be incorporated into the article?

There, in my mind, as I was going over the links, was the crucial distinction. It isn't that those papers are uninteresting, it's that they were not worked into the narrative. That they were not practical to work into the narrative suggested that the findings were not central to the topic. Hence my request for a discussion. Cheers, Piano non troppo (talk) 07:36, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I've removed the list again, after having it replaced by an editor who was shortly afterward banned as a sockpuppet.[10] [11]

When there are hundreds of articles to choose from, having Wiki editors pick-and-choose is original research WP:OR, and possibly synthesis WP:SYN. A reliable source, such as a government agency, or an authority in the field should choose which papers are most significant, which papers have authority in the community. Otherwise, there's nothing stopping some pro or con lobby from filling the Wiki article with WP:BIAS that no typical reader would have a way assessing. Piano non troppo (talk) 19:21, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I second the opinion of Piano. Although removing extra references may seem useful, censorship is not the right answer. If the link is bogus and has no merrit, ie points to an obviously opinionated blog, then remove it. I have seen too many articles on Wikipedia with references to sources that are not accurate or are opinions. Blogs are not scientific proof. 75.41.185.182 (talk) 15:17, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Chili is a dish. Chile is a fruit.

I can't believe that this hasn't been changed. With the world looking at Wiki daily, to have this kind of error is shameful. --Jsderwin (talk) 21:47, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Please check the discussions above. Cacycle (talk) 22:46, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Yah I read it. It's wrong. It needs to be changed. Chile is native to the Americas and we spell the word Chile. The rest of the world should accept the correct spelling. --Jsderwin (talk) 04:39, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

This spelling debate is embarassing. Who cares? Is there a similar thing going on in the "Colour/Color" article? Anyway, ask an Englishman if you want to know how to spell in English! Only, joking Matthewcgirling (talk) 21:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Superstition

Why does the psychological explanation of people's liking for chillies appear under the head of "Superstition"? Could somebody move it to a better place?
Also, in support for the stated use of chili with lemon in India, please google "nimbu-mirchi" (Hindi for "lemon-chili"). It's a very common phenomenon, and you may find something that can be cited.
I suspect, however, that once the psychology point is moved out, the superstition topic wouldn't be left with much. Ankurtg (talk) 15:11, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Agree...It's more about Hinduism than about chillis. Matthewcgirling (talk) 21:26, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced content removal

Some of the more dubious and unsourced content has been withdrawn from this article. If you wish to view it, please see this diff: [12] -- The material is not lost, it remains in the history and is clearly visible here. Please feel free to add it back, provided you have a reliable source to back it. Thanks! JBsupreme (talk) ✄ ✄ ✄ 03:35, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Infinity Chilli

There is a new record breaking chilli called Infinity Chilli. It has a Scoville Scale Rating of 1,176,182. Can someone add this to the article? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12505344 — Ganeshk (talk) 17:40, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Thai chili

Thai chili is referred to as a single C. frutescens variety and a plant of the species C. annuum is used as illustration... Thai chili is not a single variety(and at least 3 species have "Thai" varieties) and some editing is needed but I want a general consensus before editing... also see Bird´s Eye talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrontosaurusLove (talk • contribs) 14:41, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I have a strong doubt chilli peppers originated in South America for the entire world as there is wrriten evidence that Chillies existed in India way before the Portugese discovered in South America. If you look at the Chilli pepers found in India none of them look like the ones found in South America. Closest one is the Serranno pepper. I have a feeling it is more like Darwins theory were similar things but slightly different are on two parts of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.195.196.19 (talk) 01:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I have the same doubt as well. Since there are definitely varieties of Indian Chillies that grow wild and are about 1 cm long and very hot. But having said that unless we have a reference from a peer reviewed article about multiple origins of Chilli pepper, we cannot use that in Wikipedia. rams81 (talk) 15:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Chiles probably made their way to India 500 years ago. The chances they have grown and mutated into different sizes and shapes are likely. Not to mention, I haven't seen any Indian chiles that don't look like varieties located in the Americas. --Jsderwin (talk) 07:02, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Great read on the etomolgy of the words, chili, chilli and chile

This should probably be added somewhere in the article to help quell the debate about the correct spelling.

"Chili, Chilli, Chile, or Pimento?

Columbus believed that he had arrived in the Orient when he landed on the islands of the Caribbean Sea. He was so convinced of this that he called the islands the Indies, the natives were labeled Indians, and to the confusion of all who came after him, the pungent spice they ate was named pimiento after the completely unrelated black pepper—pimienta—that he sought. The indigenous Arawaks, his Indians, called the fruit axí (pronounced "aah hee") that was transliterated in Spanish to ají (ajé or agí).

Today the pungent varieties are still called ají in the Dominican Republic (formerly Española) and a few other places in the Caribbean and much of South America. In the Andean area the ancient words uchu and huayca are used for capsicums by some Amerindian groups. In Spain American peppers are called pimiento or pimientón (depending on the size) after pimienta or black pepper from India. However, the Spanish names did not stay with the plant through Europe; it is called peperone in Italy, piment in France, and paprika by the Slavic peoples in the Balkans.

In 1519 when the Spaniards arrived in Mexico, the Nahuatl-speaking natives called their fiery fruit chilli. The main interest of the initial Iberian explorers was conquest, then gold and silver; chilies and other plants were of little concern to them. Fifty years later a different type of Spaniard arrived. Dr. Francisco Hernandez, physician to the King of Spain, was the first European to collect plants in the Americas. Hernandez lived in Mexico from 1570 to 1577, and when he returned to Spain, he produced four books on the natural history of the plants and animals he had found in New Spain. He heard the Nahuatl speakers pronouncing the name of their pungent native spice "chee yee." Consequently, when he wrote about that plant, he gave the Nahuatl word a Spanish spelling, using the double ll to reproduce the "y" sound he had heard the natives make. The Nahuatl stem chil-refers to the chili plant. It also means 'red.' To the generic word "chilli" the term that described the particular chili cultivar was added (e.g., tonalchilli for a chili of the sun or summer, chiltecpin for a flea chili, etc.). At some point the Spanish speakers in Mexico changed the original Hernandez spelling to chile. Today, that word refers to both pungent and sweet types of chilies and is used Nahuatl-style combined with a descriptive adjective, such as chile colorado (for a red chili) or chile poblano (for a Pueblo chili). Confusingly, the same Mexican variety can have different names in different geographic regions, in various stages of maturity, or in the dried state.

In Portuguese pimenta is used for capsicums and qualifies the various types—pimenta-da-caiena, cayenne pepper; pimenta-da-malagueta, red pepper; pimenta-doreino, black pepper; pimenta-da-jamaica, allspice; while pimentão is pimento, red pepper, or just pepper. Ají and chile are not found in a Portuguese dictionary, nor did Portuguese settlers or explorers carry these words with them in their travels.

The Dutch and English were probably responsible for introducing the current capsicum names to the eastern part of the Old World because in Australia, India, Indonesia, and Southeast Asia in general, chilli (spelled chillies or sometimes chilly) is used by English speakers for the pungent types, while the mild ones are called capsicums. Each Far Eastern language has its own word for chilies—prik in Thai and mirch in Hindi, to name but two.

The most confusion with regard to spelling exists in the United States, especially in California and the Southwest. Here, one finds both the anglicized spelling chili (chilies) and the Spanish spelling chile (chiles) used by some for the pungent fruits of the Capsicum plant, while "chili" is also used as a short form of chili con carne, a variously concocted mixture of meat and chilies. The Oxford English Dictionary offers chilli as the primary spelling, calling chile and chili variants. Webster's New International Dictionary prefers chili, followed by the Spanish chile and the Nahuatl chilli. Chilli remains the spelling most used by English-speaking people throughout the world.

For the sake of clarity and consistency, it would help if capsicums or peppers were used when speaking of the fruit of the Capsicum in general, both sweet and pungent; chilli or chilli pepper for the pungent types; chili for the spicy meat dish; and pimento for the sweet, thick-fleshed, heart-shaped red capsicum. Chile (in italics) should refer to a native Mexican cultivar or, in its not italicized form, it should refer to the long green or red variety from New Mexico or California. Whenever possible, the name of the specific fruit type, group, or cultivar name should be used."

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/chili-pepper-1#ixzz1dBkXRRHW

Since the primary chiles I come across and use are that of the large green New Mexican (Anaheim), poblano or dried varieties common to the southwest and Mexico, I naturally gravitate towards 'chile' as my way of spelling the fruit. --Jsderwin (talk) 06:56, 9 November 2011 (UTC)