Talk:Tabasco sauce

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Louisiana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Louisiana.

McIlhenny's Gold

There's a new book that was just written by Jeffrey Rothfeder that finally brings into focus the real history of this company. A lot of what McI states as their history is actually fiction.

Length of Aging?

I vaguely recall a documenatry on PBS about Tabasco, and the length of time to age it surprised me; something like 5-10 years. Anyone know exactly how long?

On the bottle it says 5 years.--68.212.84.101 05:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Er, if you follow the "make your own tabasco sauce" link at the bottom of the page it talks about the "original" aging process, 3 years then "some more", etc etc... Tzf 23:23, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The TABASCO.com web site says that the pepper mash is aged for three years before it's mixed with vinegar, stirred intermittently for another month, and then bottled. --Skb8721 16:56, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is then the oldest American food patent? Necco wafers? Rlquall 15:51, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Good Question! BigFatDave 05:14, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It rocks

This stuff is too damn good to explain, jsut trust me its amazing!!

That garlic sauce is pretty good too... it's very mild on both heat and garlic-ness, but still tasty. 76.5.131.126 16:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naming

The introductory text says that the sauce gained its name not from the Mexican state of Tabasco but from the tabasco pepper. From where did the pepper get its name? If it was from the state, then the sauce did indirectly get its name from Tabasco state. If the sauce named the pepper used in its production, then surely this is worthy of comment. Anyone know for sure either way? Nach0king 20:00, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the pepper got its name from the sauce; the pepper just had a generic name until in 1888 it was officially named for the sauce into which it was made. The sauce itself, however, was named after the Mexican state.

--Skb8721 21:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. On closer reading, the introductory text says that the sauce "acquired its name from the state of Tabasco in Mexico." And that's correct. The pepper was named for the sauce, and the sauce was named for the Mexican state. So no need to alter the text.

--Skb8721 22:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate Promotion of Product?

I don't think the below line is appropriate for Wikipedia. It is promotional, in my opinion, and there is already a link to TABASCO.com in the article.

"Tabasco sauce is appreciated greatly by the U.S. military. To obtain more information about Tabasco's military sales or to contact the McIllhenny Company military sales director visit the Tabasco home page at TABASCO.com."

Any comments?

--Skb8721 15:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, the rest of that section handles the relationship to the US military much better. -- Solipsist 09:29, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Critique of Trivia Section

I don't have a problem with the Trivia section. Other articles have Trivia sections (or Miscellanea sections), which serve a genuine purpose -- to present data that by its nature does not fall neatly into the remainder of the article.

I suggest we bring back the Trivia section until we discuss whether or not it should be retained or removed. Any comments?

--Skb8721 15:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other articles tend to have trivia sections full of garbage. In this case the cultural aspect may be seen as important, so I don't object to it being replaced, but is it really adding something to the article to pick out every film and famous person that has ever used Tabasco? Chris Cunningham 16:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Super Bowl

I'd heard that the success of the sauce was related in some way to a Super Bowl ad. Is there any truth to this? David 22:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There have been a few Tabasco ads produced for the Super Bowl, but these were made relatively recently, after Tabasco sauce was already famous worldwide. --Skb8721 20:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tabasco™ Sauce

Do we really need to have the ™ cluttering up the page? This isn't a McIlhenny press release, and I don't think it's condoned by the manual of style. --Dhartung | Talk 20:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe just put it only after the first reference to the trademark? Also, it should perhaps be a (R) (circle R) symbol, not a TM symbol? --Skb8721 02:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, it should be removed from all but the first reference. Actually, I believe it should be removed from all references---after all, the article clearly states that the name is a trademark. The symbol adds no information and needn't be included to appease marketers, who are universally mentally retarded. I will do this. Furthermore I will rearrange the trademark's mention in the tabasco pepper article, which, being a botanical article, doesn't need a third of its intro paragraph dedicated to advertising bullshit. 69.250.43.106 04:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:MOSTM makes it clear it should be avoided. hateless 18:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History Section

I took a crack (my first) at rewriting the History section, as before it just felt very advertisey and not written like a Wikipedia article should be written. I don't think it's perfect now, but it should hopefully be an improvement. --RufoSanch 22:40, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]