Talk:Chocolate

It's happening again

After going out of semi-protection, this time it took a little longer for vandalism to get to the level making the article un-editable. But now it is. I believe it is time for semi-protection to set again. Eldar (talk) 22:22, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Archive 4

Any threads that have not been active for a month or so have been moved to Archive 4. --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:58, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from MarcoMaya, 9 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Chocolate (pronounced /ˈtʃɒklɨt/ ( listen) or /ˈtʃɒkəlɨt/) comprises a number of raw and processed foods produced from the seed of the tropical Theobroma cacao tree. Cacao has been cultivated for at least three millennia in Mexico, Central America, with its earliest documented use around 1500 BC. The majority of the Mesoamerican people made chocolate beverages, including the Aztecs, who made it into a beverage known as cacahuaatl '[ref]Fray Alonso de Molina: Vocabulario en Lengua Castellana y Mexicana y Mexicana y Castellana. The seeds of the cacao tree have an intense bitter taste, and must be fermented to develop the flavor. If you disagree on erasing xocoatl, please look at the next section Etymology or read the sources. It is true xocoatl never appears in classical nahuatl sources. Some of the articles are written of really good scholars. I have put my reference on the very best nahuatl-spanish dictonary in italics. MarcoMaya (talk) 09:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Note: I can't readily verify the source. But it's in the special collections vault at my library. I'll try to locate it if no one else fulfills this request in a timely manner. -Atmoz (talk) 15:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

So how did they render their word for "chocolate" in English letters? Is this just a case of different transcriptions of Nahuatl into English letters? --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to decline this until the source can be verified. Is there an online version of this book, such as on Google Books or JSTOR? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:43, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Oops, never mind, I found it. I'm trying to verify it now. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:46, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately there aren't any page numbers, but I'm pretty sure I've found it; the spelling above isn't exact but the entry reads "Cacauaatl. beuida de cacao", which my rudimentary Spanish is translating as "drink of chocolate". If anyone else wants to confirm, here's the Google Books link, and there are two other digitalizations available at the book's article. I'll still leave this for now, just to make sure there's a consensus for it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:04, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

From a source I have long forgotten the identity of, I recall the native name as "xoco-lot". This might only be a confusion matter... Regards, Nikevich (talk) 06:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Minor copy-editing query

I see, near the beginning of the text,

"Cocoa solids contain alkaloids such as theobromine and phenethylamine, which have physiological effects on the body. It has been linked to serotonin levels in the brain."

What does 'it' refer back to? Is it the substance called "cocoa solids", or is it an instance of "it", drifting into contemporary usage with a plural antecedent, referring to theobromine and phenethylamine? Regards, Nikevich (talk) 06:59, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Omitted topics, or close...

From the Wikipedia articel about the history of chocolate:

"At the end of the 18th century, the first form of solid chocolate was invented in Turin by Doret. This chocolate was sold in large quantities from 1826 by Pierre Paul Caffarel. In 1819, F. L. Cailler opened the first Swiss chocolate factory. In 1828, Dutchman Coenraad Johannes van Houten patented a method for extracting the fat from cocoa beans and making powdered cocoa and cocoa butter. Van Houten also developed the "so-called" Dutch process of treating chocolate with alkali to remove the bitter taste. This made it possible to form the modern chocolate bar. It is believed that the Englishman Joseph Fry made the first chocolate for eating in 1847, followed in 1849 by the Cadbury brothers."

IIrc, this article (Chocolate) doesn't mention pressing to extract cocoa butter, nor does it describe the alkali process; both seem like quite-serious omissions. Regards, Nikevich (talk) 10:21, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

This article also seems to omit refining, or at least to try to include it in the conching description, even though the conching article makes no mention of this beong a grinding step. Raisedonadiet (talk) 10:02, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Cacao

"Around three quarters of the world's cacao bean production takes place in West Africa."

I may not be right, but doesn't English only use the word "cocoa?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.50.74.105 (talk) 03:17, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Choco bakery defined

“A snack product that combines a traditional sweet or savory flour based biscuit, wafer or cake with chocolate aggregates, a chocolate layer/coating or a biscuit molded with chocolate”.

Choco bakery products are normally born from new product ideas stemming from traditional biscuit brands and makers mark, but recently chocolate brands have entered and gained prominence in this blurred consumer space. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.228.220.37 (talk) 16:45, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Pleasure

In the first paragraph under "Potential health effects," the word "pleasure" links to the article on Epicureanism. Why not just have it link to the Pleasure article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.40.37 (talk) 02:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 76.115.61.55, 3 February 2011

{{edit semi-protected}}

Can you please put: http://www.luluschocolate.com on the map? We have been making yummy Raw Chocolate since 2007! Spanks!

76.115.61.55 (talk) 04:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Not done: See WP:LINKFARM. Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files. Viriditas (talk) 05:08, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Child labor

As it is currently written, this article and the related one on children in cocoa production read as an attempt to bury the child labor, exploitation and slavery / forced labor issue. It's a big issue, one that deserves its own subheading under Production, so it would show up in the listing of sections at the top and people could become aware of it. See for example: http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/24/news/international/chocolate_bittersweet.fortune/

I'd suggest collecting the few sentences you have, adding a reference to the other central issue of exploitation and forced labor (i.e., it's not just that children are working - they are working against their will, often as captives), and the link to the other article on the topic, under a suitable subheading in the Production section.

It doesn't have to be long, but it shouldn't be disingenous to the point of being misleading, as it is now. "Children in cocoa production" is an incredible understatement of the issue. Google on chocolate slavery, if you need a reality check. 68.162.207.160 (talk) 20:35, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

YouTube video of interesting chocolate maker in Paris

Came across a cool video of a chocolate shop -- chocolate sculptures, candies, etc. People who follow this page may wish to consider adding it to the external links: Visit to a Paris chocolate shop --Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:10, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Chocolate making process

"Chocolate in its solid form was invented in 1847." And the next paragraph: "For hundreds of years, the chocolate making process remained unchanged. When the people saw the Industrial Revolution arrive, many changes occurred that brought about the food today in its modern form." And again: "In the 18th century, mechanical mills were created that squeezed out cocoa butter..." I see some inconsistency with the dates, because the 18th century means the 1700s, and the Industrial Revolution was close to its end in 1847.--80.99.207.235 (talk) 17:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

After looking at the timeline of chocolate I couldn't see anything I would want to change in those paragraphs. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 17:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Source

• (video) "The dark side of chocolate." CNN. April 6, 2011.

WhisperToMe (talk) 23:00, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

All fieldmuseum.org links (in citations) are obselete

Many linked pages used in citations for this article appear to have been removed from the fieldmuseum.org site.

Penina (talk) 13:22, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Health Effects

in Health effects, boost appears to have been misspelled as bust, which changes the meaning. I checked the article cited and I'm quite sure it should be boost not bust. Please fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.24.65.33 (talk) 04:15, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Y Done Thanks for the note. Typo fixed. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 16:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I LOVE CHOCOLATE EVEN THOUGHT IT ROTS YOUR TEETH YUM!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.160.96 (talk) 16:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 67.187.98.9, 14 June 2011

"or as the Aztecs called it, a "tribute."

I highly doubt the Aztecs spoke Latin, but I could be crazy.

67.187.98.9 (talk) 17:50, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, nice catch! The old link was dead, so when I found the source I reworded it. I think someone was trying to be a little too close to the source text. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 23:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Spelling

A Google search on CHOCALATE returns 5 million hits. Is this just a mis-spelling, or a genuine variation? It ought to be included in the diambiguation, but that is locked

109.144.246.87 (talk) 22:37, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Vase Image

Describing the seated individual on the Maya vase painting as a "chief" is incorrect. It would be more accurate to describe them as a "lord" or "ajaw." Furthermore, in depictions such as this one it is common for the seated individual to be receiving gifts. The bowl of chocolate was thus likely given to the lord by the kneeling individual. Rather than "forbidding" the kneeling individual from touching the bowl, it seems more likely that the depicted hand gesture is simply a motion accompanying speech. The caption as depicted -"A Mayan chief forbids a person to touch a jar of chocolate"- should be accompanied by a reference to a scholarly source if that is indeed the interpretation of an epigrapher who has studied the vase. Otherwise, a more accurate caption would read "A Maya lord accepts a bowl of chocolate." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blackliota (talk • contribs) 01:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Fermentation?

How are the beans fermented? Is water added, yeast or bacteria? What happens chemically during fermentation? Do we get ethanol or lactic acid? AxelBoldt (talk) 21:08, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Photos Abstract Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 01:52, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Maybe we should add some of that information to the article. AxelBoldt (talk) 22:36, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

QUESTION: Does Fermentation actually improve the flavour? Or is it done to help remove the shell? 24.85.227.243 (talk) 04:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Fermentation is required for flavor. There's a lot of sources, page 88 of this [1] document talks about this and seems to be authoritative. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:00, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Redundent text

The HISTORY section contains the following text:

The Aztec adaptation of the drink was a bitter, frothy, spicy drink called xocolatl, made much the same way as the Mayan chocolate drinks. It was often seasoned with vanilla, chile pepper, and achiote, and was believed to fight fatigue, which is probably attributable to the theobromine content, a mood enhancer. Because cacao would not grow in the dry central Mexican highlands and had to be imported, chocolate was an important luxury good throughout the Aztec empire, and cocoa beans were often used as currency.[16]

In the New World, chocolate was consumed in a bitter, spicy drink called xocoatl, and was often flavored with vanilla, chili pepper, and achiote (known today as annatto).[17] Xocoatl was believed to fight fatigue, a belief that is probably attributable to the theobromine content. Chocolate was also an important luxury good throughout pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, and cacao beans were often used as currency.[18] For example, the Aztecs used a system in which one turkey cost one hundred cacao beans and one fresh avocado was worth three beans.[19] South American and European cultures have used cocoa to treat diarrhea for hundreds of years.[20]

I think it should read as follows:

The Aztec adaptation of the drink was a bitter, frothy, spicy drink called xocolatl, made much the same way as the Mayan chocolate drinks. It was often seasoned with vanilla, chile pepper, and achiote (known today as annatto)[16], and was believed to fight fatigue, which is probably attributable to the theobromine content, a mood enhancer. Because cacao would not grow in the dry central Mexican highlands and had to be imported, chocolate was an important luxury good throughout the Aztec empire, and cocoa beans were often used as currency.[17][18] For example, the Aztecs used a system in which one turkey cost one hundred cacao beans and one fresh avocado was worth three beans.[19] South American and European cultures have used cocoa to treat diarrhea for hundreds of years.[20]

Footnotes [16] and [17] would have to be switched if this change is made.

68.127.148.79 (talk) 20:25, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Producers

Barry Callebaut is the largest producer of chocolate in the world, not Mars or Hersey as the article states unsourced. Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576065653793194740.html Why is this article semi-protected anyway? it's about chocolate fgs :o--85.151.204.175 (talk) 08:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

• The semi-protection is due to massive repeated vandalism, up to not being able to maintain the page. Several attempts to lift the semi-protection failed (the vandalism returned each time). Eldar (talk) 22:28, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

This might even be true, though hard to verify, if the ranking is "Company that sells the most chocolate" and not "Company that sells the most stuff (including chocolate)". Kraft and the others are much larger companies but have many other product lines; Callebaut also sells fruit snacks and hard candy. I wish we had a better reference than an off-hand line in the WSJ, thoguh. Soemthing ranking chocolate sales by company, perhaps? Can Google find this for me? --Wtshymanski (talk) 16:39, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 November 2011

please add si:චොකලට් to the language bar since we have translated some part of this article into sinhala.

නීසා (talk) 16:22, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Y Done, thanks--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Resource regarding Planetary boundaries and Holocene extinction

From Talk:Effects of global warming ...

• Climate Change Could Melt Chocolate Production; A new study shows that cocoa will suffer under climate change by Tiffany Stecker and ClimateWire Scientific American October 3, 2011
• Climate change: Will chocolate become a costly luxury? If temperatures continue to rise, a new report suggests, West Africa, source of half the world's chocolate, will be unfit to grow the coveted beans posted on The Week September 30, 2011

See Climate change and agriculture and Effect of climate change on plant biodiversity.

141.218.36.41 (talk) 22:16, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 January 2012

Improvements to storage of chocolate (with source)

Trivial change: "Ideal temperature for storing chocolate is 16-18 C, but will do very well up to 24 C."

Optional non-formatted change: Fat bloom is caused by storage temperature fluctuating or exceeding 24 C while sugar bloom is caused by temperature below 15 C or excess humidity. To distinguish between different types of bloom, one can rub the surface of the chocolate lightly, and if the bloom disappears, it is fat bloom. One can get rid of bloom by re-tempering the chocolate or using it for anything that requires melting the chocolate.

Source: Frederic Bau (Editor), Clay McLachlan (Photographer), Pierre Herme (Foreword), L'Ecole du Grand Chocolat Valrhona (Contributor) (2011). Cooking With Chocolate: Essential Recipes and Techniques. Paris: Flammarion, S.A. pp. 147. ISBN 978-2-08-020081-5 80.220.71.129 (talk) 08:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Done. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:47, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Messed up links to other languages

Can someone explain why the last edit [2] degraded all the links to chocolate articles in other languages to a bunch of red links at the bottom? Mikael Häggström (talk) 12:43, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

The reference was entered twice. When I removed the second entry (in External Links), the problem disappeared. While checking that it had disappeared I saw interaction between the two references briefly, but I could not see how or why they were interacting, the formatting appeared OK. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 21:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the problem Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Tempering section and chocolate melting point

In the tempering section, the citation for the six crystalline forms of cocoa butter (citation #61) appears to link to an About.com page that does not actually mention anything about crystalline forms whatsoever. I would like to point out a more suitable reference taken from the following paper (which involved x-ray crystallography):

Loisel et al. "Phase Transitions and Polymorphism of Cocoa Butter". JAOCS, Vol. 75, no. 4 (1998)

On page 426, Table 2 gives seven separate references for the melting point of each form of cocoa butter. The current Wikipedia article closely resembles "reference 10" from Loisel et al 1998 (Wille, R.L., and E.S. Lutton, Polymorphism of CB, Ibid. 43:491–496 1966) in both temperatures and labeling conventions, and so it may be the most appropriate as a replacement citation for #61 on the Wikipedia page.

The I-VI labeling convention seems to be the most popular, and so I would definitely recommend sticking with it. In addition, the Loisel 1998 paper should probably also be cited somewhere in the body of the text, for those interested in the current scientific consensus on the melting point of various stages of cocoa butter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.41.13.42 (talk) 05:37, 24 February 2012 (UTC)