Jump to content

Talk:Époisses

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 10:22, 1 February 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject France}}, {{WikiProject Food and drink}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

[Untitled]

[edit]

I have just come across the statement, quoted from a book The Devil's Picnic, that the pungent odor of époisses has caused it to be banned from the Paris Metro.

Question: can anyone substantiate this statement (with a reference to an authoritative source) or is it just another urban myth?

Ah, another fan of the NYT acrostic puzzles :) I suspect you want a primary source; for all we know, The Devil's Picnic is authoritative. - Nunh-huh 21:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think this myth is inspired by the real case of the Durian. William Avery (talk) 13:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I emailed the RATP asking if there was a specific list of forbidden products in the metro. The response was Le transport de tous produits dangereux ou entrainant la gêne des autres usagers est interdit. (It is forbidden to transport any products dangerous or bothersome to other passengers). They didn't mention a reference or source, and I couldn't find the specific French law at http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/ Tinfoiled (talk) 08:45, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The passage now in the article doesn't say that it's banned on the metro, it says that it's been reported that it's banned on the metro. It has been reported, in fact IMO it's pretty clear that this is an urban legend — but here we run up against policy WP:OR. Being pretty clear doesn't save a claim of urban-legend-hood from being original research, and your personal testimony that you emailed the RATP doesn't save that from being original research, either. An online publication that confirms it's not true would be a reliable source allowing that to be added to the information already provided (i.e., it's been reported and it isn't true). A reliable source that says it's an urban legend would be better than the existing one that only shows that it's been reported; I'd love to be able to say in the article that it's an urban legend. --JNShutt (talk) 22:34, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to here, it is not, in fact, banned from public transport in France. I've removed the related passage. Nivomi (talk) 14:34, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

maybe the really ripe versions from like a cheese market, but some Camembert smells much worse these days in grocery stores Markthemac (talk) 01:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just got a 9 oz (250 g) wheel at the natural foods market in Augusta GA - Epoisses Berthaut - OMG it was fabulous. We had it with beer. b_calder (talk) 03:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"de Bourgogne"?

[edit]

How confident are we that the correct page title is "Époisses de Bourgogne" and not simply "Époisses", or "Époisses (cheese)"?

While Époisses seems to be commonly sold as "Époisses de Bourgogne" in Britain, it's known as "Époisses" in France. French online sources refer to the cheese and its AOC simply as "Époisses".

It seems to me that the "de Bourgogne" affix is primarily an affectation of British cheese marketers and has no rightful place in the name of the cheese or the title of the article. Note the image used in the article - the box is clearly marked "Époisses (Appellation d'Origine Controlée)" with no "de Bourgogne" in sight.

I suggest the title should be corrected to reflect the standard French style. Anyone agree or disagree?

5.66.105.149 (talk) 14:17, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, seems it wouldn't be unqualified "Époisses" because that's already an article about the place, and if the cheese is named after the place I, at least, would think the place would get the unadorned name.
The french article is Époisses (fromage). The user (User:Bob247) who created the English article, in 2005, first called it Époisses cheese, then a few days later renamed it to Époisses (cheese) and the day after that to its current name.
Looking at the top eight non-Wikipedia google matches (for me), I see three unqualified "Époisses" (with or without accent), notably including an NYT article (one of the other two later qualifies it as de Bourgogne); two "Epoisses de Bourgogne" (no accent); one "Eppoisses by Berthaut"; and one " Epoisses de Burgundy Cheese" (that one's Amazon.com).
So on this fairly light inspection, likely this ought to be moved to Époisses (cheese). --Pi zero (talk) 17:11, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Minor, readability

[edit]

There's a double negative in the health risk section "...Époisses imported into the United States having been aged not more than 49 days has been prohibited" does that mean the cheese has to be 49 or less days old to be imported? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.198.151.36 (talk) 09:24, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 September 2020

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: This is a case of WP:NOGOODOPTIONS – everyone agrees that Époisses de Bourgogne is inadequate but there's no consensus for the target title. So, as a closer, I'll pick up Époisses cheese, preferred by some panelists, as a compromise version, without claiming a hard consensus for it. Per the evidence in #Other cheeses named after places, for comparison kindly provided by B2C, the X cheese form is the most prevalent for similar situations, thus satisfying WP:NATURAL and WP:CONSISTENCY. No such user (talk) 12:54, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Époisses de Bourgogne → Époisses (cheese) – The cheese is listed by the French government (AOC and AOP) as "Époisses", is known as such in France, the French wikipedia page is "Époisses (fromage)", and the great majority of Google results are simply "Époisses" tout court. "Époisses de Bourgogne" is used in a small minority of sources, chiefly British commercial sites. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 15:56, 7 September 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. Megan☺️ Talk to the monster 19:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As evidence in support of the move, please consider the Ngram results for "Époisses" and "Époisses de Bourgogne":
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?smoothing=3&corpus=26&year_end=2019&year_start=1800&content=%C3%89poisses%2C++%C3%89poisses+de+Bourgogne&direct_url=t1%3B%2C%C3%89poisses%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2C%C3%89poisses%20de%20Bourgogne%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2C%C3%89poisses%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2C%C3%89poisses%20de%20Bourgogne%3B%2Cc0
Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 09:44, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please also consider this French government document from 2010 defining the terms of Époisses AOC:
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000022825025&categorieLien=id
Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 08:15, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A note on "Époisses de Bourgogne AOC". "Époisses de Bourgogne" is an obsolete legal definition that existed in French law from May 1991 until April 1995, when it was superseded by the term "Époisses". The relevant French govenment documents can be downloaded here and here.
In summary, the first decree defines the conditions which must be met in order for a cheese to be sold under the name "Époisses de Bourgogne". The second decree supersedes the first, and replaces "Époisses de Bourgogne" with "Époisses" in every instance.
Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 13:19, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that "Époisses de Bourgogne" is neither the correct name of the cheese (which is "Époisses") nor the common name (which is "Époisses"). "Époisses" and "Époisses (cheese)" are both more concise and more correct. To take "Camembert" as a model, "Camembert de Normandie" (which is a real AOP, unlike "Époisses de Bourgogne") is a redirect to "Camembert", while the village in Normandy from which the cheese takes its name is at "Camembert, Orne". Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 09:41, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Meh. Who are we to argue with cheese.com or truefoodies.com? Not the greatest sources but enough to demonstrate it’s not totally contrived. —В²C ☎ 17:20, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sugesting that "Époisses de Bourgogne" is totally contrived - only that it's not correct, concise, or common enough to be preferable to the alternatives. Also, notice that the truefoodies.com article discloses its sources - including cheese.com and wikipedia!
Let me add that as it stands, the first sentence of this article is incorrect. "Époisses de Bourgogne" is NOT a legally demarcated cheese! "Époisses" is a legally demarcated cheese. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 21:49, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point, and your suggestion seems like a reasonable alternative. However, Wikipedia has no consistency in the matter: "Stilton", "Wensleydale", "Caerphilly", "Livarot" and "Jarlsberg" are primarily places, while "Brie", "Roquefort", and "Camembert" are primarily cheeses. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 10:00, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add that French villages tend to be listed as "commune comma département", so "Époisses, Côte-d'Or" might be a more consistent name than "Époisses (village)". Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 14:27, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. Updated my counter-proposal above accordingly. —В²C ☎ 04:46, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, "Époisses (village)" is probably clearer to most English speakers, and is unambiguous: there's only one village of that name. I'm actually ambivalent on the matter - I think both options have merit. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 11:36, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Natural disambiguation is preferred per WP:NATURAL. This is not as natural as US city, state, but as you’ve shown we have precedent. —В²C ☎ 17:11, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I should also note that this would be in line with MOS:FRANCE § Cities and communes. 207.161.86.162 (talk) 20:16, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All I can is I want out of this RM. I restored, but have now struck the word bizarre. Please leave me alone In ictu oculi (talk) 15:13, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ngram results heavily favour "Époisses" over "Époisses cheese":
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=%C3%89poisses%2C%C3%89poisses+cheese&year_start=1970&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3
If the village is considered primary, I'd strongly prefer "Époisses (cheese)" to "Époisses cheese", since the name of the cheese is "Époisses", not "Époisses cheese". The version with parentheses is clear, and more correct. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 11:30, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It’s not valid to compare one word to two words. eg. As I said, many sources call it "Époisses cheese". It is called "Époisses cheese" by many. Eg. And the exceptions are like in cheese comparisons where they don’t want every tenth word to be “cheese”. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:17, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a fair comparison. "Époisses" refers only to the cheese, or to the village from which it takes its name, and most references to the village are as the source of the cheese. "Many" is a weasel word, and the example you gave is a poor English translation of a French page. "Full milk"? "Brune breed"? "Strength and elegance are met"?
From a brief survey of the first two pages of Googlebooks results for "Époisses", there are 14 references to "Époisses" tout court as the cheese, or the village as the source of the cheese, 2 other references to the village (the château and museum), 2 to "Époisses cheese", and 1 to "Époisses de Bourgogne". Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 22:09, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that “Époisses cheese” is a term means that it is a title preferred over “Époisses (cheese)”. You challenge “many”? Do you disagree that quality sources use “Époisses cheese”? That seems odd. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:17, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't dispute that "Époisses cheese" is a valid English phrase. The Ngrams suggest, and closer scrutiny confirms, that few good sources prefer "Époisses cheese" to "Époisses" tout court.
I think the question of parentheses is actually quite subtle. I'll add a note below. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 23:05, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Époisses should be considered unavailable due to the village, which should follow the French Wikipedia article, fr:Époisses. Is that to say that, in your view, the village is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term, SmokeyJoe? 207.161.86.162 (talk) 21:05, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would normally lean to saying PRIMARYTOPIC doesn’t apply to two highly connected topics, the village or the cheese known for the village, but in this case the village came first, which is one factor. In this case, it being a French cheese and a French village, I think we should defer to the French Wikipedia titling. Inconsistency between this and the native language Wikipedia can’t help anyone. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:35, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, why not follow the French Wikipedia model ("Époisses (fromage)") for the name of the cheese? Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 22:14, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
“Le fromage Époisses” is the French term, “Époisses fromage” doesn’t work, which explains their parenthetical. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:21, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SmokeyJoe: I would normally lean to saying PRIMARYTOPIC doesn’t apply to two highly connected topics, the village or the cheese known for the village. While the two topics are connected etymologically (though perhaps not "highly connected" generally), I don't see anything in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC that suggests connected topics fall outside of its purview.
but in this case the village came first, which is one factor. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC indicates that "long-term significance" is a factor, but that is not the same thing as looking at which came first. Rather, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC tells us that "historical age is not determinative" and "being the original source of the name is also not determinative". So what would be the rationale for the village's coming first serving as a factor here?
In this case, it being a French cheese and a French village, I think we should defer to the French Wikipedia titling. Given that our article title guidelines are different on the English Wikipedia (never mind the fact that language usage varies between languages), why would we do that? 207.161.86.162 (talk) 03:45, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure why we should defer to French WP titling. Does the French WP prefer natural disambiguation to the same extent that the English one does? In any case, we have our title conventions. Following titling conventions from foreign language WPs is not among our WP:CRITERIA. —В²C ☎ 04:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Defer" might be the wrong word. "Consider", definitely. How French things are named by the French, especially where the names are a simple transliteration into English, is something that is or should be normal. Fr.wikipedia titling policies and guidelines appear to similar.
The French have gone for "Époisses (fromage)". The natural disambiguation in French would be "Fromage Époisses". That translates to "Époisses cheese". "Époisses fromage" is poor French, wrong word order. The French appear to go a little more willingly to parenthetical disambiguation, looking at fr:Cheddar (fromage) for the en:Cheddar cheese.
My considered favorite, of the multiple viable options, based on policy and source use, down-weighting sources from inside "Cheese" contexts and up-weighting broad context introductory usage, is Époisses cheese. Dislike Époisses (cheese) for the pointless parentheses. Oppose Époisses as ambiguous with the village. Époisses de Bourgogne, the status quo, is not CONCISE, and fails to name it as a cheese, and the "Bourgogne"/Burgundy part is a relic of the past, and is being dropped as such. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 06:32, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There does appear to be a convention to add “cheese” without parentheses, at least for cheeses so named in sources. See table in new section below. Not sure this cheese is so named in sources and we shouldn’t imply it is with our title if it isn’t. For such cheeses disambiguation of the place using the comma convention seems more common. —В²C ☎ 14:04, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The (inactive) Cheeses Taskforce actually recommends disambiguating cheeses from their geographical namesakes by adding "cheese" to the name of the cheese where appropriate. I'm not sure that this is good advice; I'll explain why when I have a moment. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 23:23, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is good advice. It is based on context. If the context is not already cheese, then it is normal to add "cheese" to the ambiguous name. If the context is already cheese, such a comparison of cheeses, or a book about cheese, or the International Journal of Cheese, then as a matter of writing style, not wanting 10% of the words to be "cheese", the word is dropped wherever possible. A Wikipedia article title has no such context of cheeses, and the default inbound link should not be assumed to be from a cheese article. Within a cheese article editors are already aware of styling issues of repeated "cheese"s and they can do the piping. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:11, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"the word is dropped wherever possible" - No, that's a fundamental misunderstanding. Nothing is being "dropped". The name of the cheese is "Époisses", by legal definition and by common usage. The only question is what (if anything) should be added to provide the necessary disambiguation. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 00:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ease up with the fundamental misunderstandings please. Your point goes to it being a lower case cheese, not Cheese. Ok, Cheeses books don’t add the descriptive term, whereas broad audience introductions do. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:10, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think we actually have more than a grain of agreement. I prefer "Époisses (cheese)" to "Époisses" for essentially the same reason you prefer "Époisses cheese": it conveys more information. "Époisses cheese" conveys to the reader that the article is about cheese, and that the word "cheese" is modified by the word "Époisses". "Époisses (cheese)" tells the reader that the article is about Époisses, and that "Époisses" is the *name* of a cheese. Placing the subject of the article as the primary noun in its title seems, to me, both more natural and more encyclopedic than the alternative. That's particularly true when the name of the cheese carries legal weight. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 13:13, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
One consequence of the Cheeses Taskforce disambiguation advice is that the primary (place) page will, in most cases, have fewer page views than the disambiguated (cheese) page. Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 13:31, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Other cheeses named after places, for comparison

[edit]
Cheeses named after places
Cheese Place Dab Country
Brie Brie (region) Brie (disambiguation) France
Camembert Camembert, Orne N/A France
Cheddar cheese Cheddar, Somerset Cheddar England
Langres cheese Langres N/A France
Édel de Cléron Cléron N/A France
Roquefort Roquefort-sur-Soulzon Roquefort (disambiguation) France
Abondance cheese Abondance, Haute-Savoie Abondance France
Jarlsberg cheese Jarlsberg Jarlsberg (disambiguation) Norway
Délice de Bourgogne Bourgogne → Burgundy N/A France
Chaource cheese Chaource N/A France
Cantal cheese Cantal N/A France
Livarot cheese Livarot N/A France
Maroilles cheese Maroilles, Nord Maroilles France
Morbier cheese Morbier N/A France

Requested move 5 August 2021

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. Page views and consensus in the discussion seem to seal the deal here, despite SmokeyJoe's objections.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:47, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

– The cheese is the primary topic for Époisses rather than the village based on relative article content substance as well as definitive page view counts: the cheese gets almost 30 times as many views as the village does. People searching with “Époisses” are far more likely to be searching for the cheese. This would be consistent with the Camembert/Camembert, Orne situation. В²C ☎ 23:28, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I guess all these also fail WP:Precise: Camembert, Brie, Roquefort, Abbaye de Belloc, Abbaye de Tamié, Saint-Marcellin, Vieux-Boulogne, etc.? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The current situation also requires a hatnote and is benefiting readers and editors even less, and is less reflective of usage in reliable sources. If anything is failing those guidelines, it's the current situation of having the municipality at the undisambiguated base name.--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:32, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This proposal “reduces recognizability” and “fails WP:precise” only from a very peculiar perspective of these criteria not shared by the WP community. The definition of recognizable per WP:CRITERIA is “the title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area will recognize.” The proposed title is surely recognizable as the name of this cheese to anyone familiar with this cheese  Done. Regarding WP:PRECISE, allowance for primary topics is specified explicitly there  Done. It’s quite disruptive to the project to distort the community-accepted meanings of these clearly defined terms in a rationalizing effort to satisfy ones own WP:JDLI personal preferences. —В²C ☎ 13:37, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Époisses&oldid=1201784267"