Talk:Coconut doughnut

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Food and drink (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
 

Should this page exist?[edit]

Do we really need a page for coconut doughnut? Where does this stop? Chocolate doughnut? Sprinkles? Glazed? Maple nut? Pdcook (talk) 00:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I would normally agree with you, and wouldn't think that a flavor of doughnut warrants its own article based on notability. Even Chocolate Ice Cream doesn't have its own article. This article will probably be nominated for deletion or redirect soon, but I won't be the one to do it. I really don't mind articles on different flavors of doughnuts. I personally think that articles on the different flavors might be notable enough with enough info and coverage on it. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
I think it's a question of substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. I think it's possible to list more varieties in the list of doughnut varieties or to create a doughnuts in the United States article. But what if someone wants to know more than just the name of these well established types? There are doughnut varieties particular to regions and with distinct history. But merging is certainly a possibility. Weight would be a problem in a combined article though.
For example bacon variants are popular right now (see maple bacon doughnut). I see these as being a worthy topic for gourmands. In a pageless encyclopedia, as long as there is good coverage in reliable independent sources there's no reason we can't include this type of article. It certainly doesn't hurt any of the other articles.
Some of the historical events, philosophers, and sports figures seem very minor to me. Did you know that any athlete who competes in the olympics is automatically deemed notable no matter how little coverage there is or how poorly they performed? I think that's ridiculous. Who cares who comes in 17th in the 200 meter skull (sp?).
But coconut doughnuts are a culinary specialty enjoyed by millions. There is no reason this knowledge needs to be excluded. You might reasonably question the priorities of the crazies working on this type of article. But if you've ever edited the "important subjects" you might see it as being a nice relief from the disputes and aggression that are involved with political and academic subjects where controveries are rife. You could also ask, do we really want the editors who are fascinated with sprinkled doughnuts contributing to our science articles? ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:22, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill comes to mind. Pdcook (talk) 01:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
As far as chocolate ice cream goes, I have no objection to someone writing an article. I think it's probably a very interesting subject. Right now it's merged as a flavor in the main ice cream article. But there are articles on Ais kacang, Dondurma, ice cream sandwiches, Frozen custard, Frozen yogurt, Gelato, Ice milk, Ice pops, Kulfi, Sherbet, Sorbet and Snow cones. These are all iced dessert variations with various ingredients. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:40, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Sugar Shack doughnut shop[edit]

Why does this article mention the Sugar Shack doughnut shop? Pdcook (talk) 00:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Their coconut doughnut was cited as being one of the best doughnuts in the United States, and apparently they had several write ups. If you do some searching you might be able to expand the coverage. For example, the article at present doesn't say anything about their recipe. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:16, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Photo[edit]

Here [1], unless someone wants to take a photo of their favorite. Grundle? ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:19, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I may be able to take a picture of a coconut doughnut over the next week or so, depending on the next time I end up going grocery shopping, and whether or not they actually sell coconut doughnuts. We'll have to see. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't accept any responsibility for any negative impacts on your cholesterol level. And apparently this doughnut type is very popular with horses (or at least itw as popular with one horse in Florida) so keep that in mind if you need to get rid of them once your work is done. Are these going to be cheap supermarket doughnuts? I'm expecting big things SH. Leave no stone unturned! ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:25, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I'm not worried about my cholesterol levels. Gotta enjoy good food before you get too old. I probably wouldn't like a coconut doughnut anyways, so I probably won't even buy one. I'll just snap a quick picture with a cruddy cell phone camera. On the same note, I was also planning to get a cheap local supermarket doughnut. Your expectations have been diminished. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

As the chair of the Doughnut Photography group, I couldn't help but upload Child's photo, which will serve until Hamster returns from the supermarket. Geoff Say something! 01:16, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Alas, I'm afraid to say that coconut doughnuts seem to be of too much greatness for my local food store to sell. Good thing you've got that alternative. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)