Jump to content

Talk:Full breakfast

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dirt290 (talk | contribs) at 03:29, 5 July 2013 (→American Breakfast). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Hash Browns?

Are Hash Browns a typical traditional full English (Scottish or Irish) fry ingredient? I would have said not - they're American, aren't they? Maybe this should be replaced with Bubble and Squeak.

edit: I like hash browns, don't get me wrong, but it's tradition, innit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.32.102.71 (talk) 15:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The correct name is latkah. The hash-brown is not what is being served up in a triangle or oval. It is of Jewish Polish origin and became popular through immigration to the USA. The hash-brown is just shallow fried grated potato. It looks like a mess of hash symbols. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.24.47.254 (talk) 12:52, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Atkins claims

Sorry, Atkins never claimed that bacon or a high cholesterol diet found in a full breakfast didn't increase the risk of heart disease. I deleted this. 152.3.85.176 00:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Mainly pork?

Is this strictly accurate? I have never referred to bacon as "pork", which I have always understood as meaning a different cut of meat entirely. The only "pork" in the dish, therefore, is the miniscule amount of ground-up trotters and gristle that one might find in a "pork sausage". Black pudding is also not "pork", as it isn't meat.

But is the dish even primarily pig meat, if that's what we mean by "pork"? It has eggs, beans, tomatoes, mushrooms, fried bread, toast, etc. TharkunColl 08:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely right. Someone changed it to pork products some time ago and it has just stuck there. Certainly there are no pork chops or ham (unless you're an American) in this kind of breakfast. Jooler 23:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The first anonymous contributor is wrong. Pork is not a "cut of meat". It's the name for the category of pig meat (and other edible parts of the pig) in general; whatever edible material we recover from a pig is technically a pork product. Bacon is a pork product; it's cured belly pork. Black pudding is also a pork product, as it's made of pig blood and pig fat (among other things). The lean pork chop is probably the least characteristic of all pork products, as one of the great things about the pig is that you can eat almost all of it, and most of the rest of the pig is fairly fatty - pig ears and pig nose are said to be especially delicious, though I've never tried them myself. Why pork should be the main meat used in a full breakfast I don't know, but there you go. Lexo (talk) 22:26, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

There are minor grammatical errors sprinkled throughout the article, but it could be just my american familiarity with English (and not knowing British maneurisms as well). I do want to make one point, however, about the References. Why is there a paragraph in the references section stating what the reference pertains? I don't think that references need to be annontated, and if there is something pertinent to the article in that reference, one should feel free to include it! I don't want to touch it if there was a reason for it being there. Thanks! WiiAlbanyGirl 00:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you are right to mention it ... surely it should be quoted in the body of the article or not at all? Abtract 01:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I annotated the reference as evidience that "Full Breakfast" was a not neologism and was a term used throughout the British Isles as a the "shared name" for English/Scottish/Irish/etc. breakfast. Personally, I don't mind it going.
The grammar errors probably cropped up with I merged the articles. Sorry. --sony-youthpléigh 08:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate image

It is my opinion that the image named Full english Boy.jpg should be removed, since the person on it clearly is the main constituent of it, rather than the - rather blurry - meal that this article is all about. It might be considered a kind of vandalism to put up an image like that, since the one responsible might be accused of simply wanting to show the person on it. Besides, even if it was a good image of a Full English Breakfast, in my opinion there are already enough images showing one in this article. Taeronai 19:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Abtract 19:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Auwww ... - I had quiet liked it, simply for its random funniness value. I thought it quite succinctly summed up the cultural value of the subject. But, I see the point in its removal. Is there another image that can replace it, showing a breakfast in situ, in its natural habitat, rather than just a plate of greasy food? Any ideas? --sony-youthpléigh 20:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Regional Variations

Is it not time to insert a section on regional variations of the 'Full English' having had a Irish breakfast or two, it is evident that there are differences. Scotch breakfasts have similar local trends. North/South English have variations. There may be others (London Grill etc).

Where did baked beans come from on a Full English anyway - it always feels like they are an add on due to lack of imagination.

A history of the evolution of the fry up might be an important section too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.79.166.250 (talk) 21:12, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Objections to Full Breakfast. Whilst searching for the term, "Ulster fry" I was pleased that I was immediately directed to an accurate description of an Ulster Fry. However searching for a "fry up" took me to Full Breakfast. I feel that full breakfast is a very poor title for the "fry up" whether it's Scottish, English, Northern Irish, Irish or Welsh. The fry up is a term exclusively used in the British Isles, were as a full breakfast is vague and could be used anywhere in the world.

I believe the purpose of the article is to express that "a fry" is a popular breakfast dish of the British Isles, with regional variations. It is often served as an all-day meal etc. It should have links to every regional variation accompanied with a photograph of each. bode.

Just a thought, but has anyone checked the references on the Scottish/Irish/Welsh version of the "Full" Breakfast? The Scottish one is a hotel where its presently called an English on their menu, the Irish ref is for an unknown catering company, and the Welsh one is for an EU promo event in Welsh food! Summary - all pretty useless references, and can't be considered reliable sources. Globally, the thing is normally called an English or fried breakfast, where as regionally I would accept that in the UK it's called a fry-up, and in Ireland an Irish or an Ulster Fry. There's Politically Correct and then there's just plain daft - and in the rules of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia, the references would only appear to support three options for a name: Full English, Fry-Up or Irish Breakfast/Ulster Fry. Can some one source some useful references if they think there are more regional variations from those three, but at present the article seems miss-named to me. Rgds, - Trident13 (talk) 02:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You probably missed reference number 1. The "regional" refs are very poor, as you say, and in fact the issue before was that we had lots of "regional" articles bickering over how may black puddings should go into an XXX breakfast etc. based on these piss-poor references. Merging was impossible because no-one would give up on the XXX in the article title (as Ulster Fry still won't - based on the argument that an Ulster Fry is eaten at anytime during the day). Scottish and Welsh breakfasts, with some complaints, were folded into English breakfast. Irish breakfast was unmoving (and rightly so, Monty was an Irishman after all - "English" breakfast, my arse!). This was quite insane for a subject that is the same but for the name given to it - and topped off by people not even being able to agree on what was within their treasured regional "variation". Rules are clear, as you say: ignore them. --sony-youthpléigh 10:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes - normal "opportunity" and particularly with this one where the word "English" is a carte blache application word for anything which refers to this group of islands. The Welsh and Scottish versions of the breakfast are normally just the basic layout with a very specific regional sausage - its more of a regional marketing effort that a real variation. The Ulster Fry is distinct, and as a language term it is used all day - more akin to the use in Britain of the term fry-up: I therefore have a neutral view on merging, particularly with the naming issues here. Still, I think the point of this article is to focus on breakfast, so lets at least agree on that. Re regional variations, I think we could expand the regional variations and choices - bubble and squeak, chips, beans, etc; in a specific section. Thoughts? Rgds, --Trident13 (talk) 21:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So traditional Scottish tattie scones, round haggis, white pudding, lorne/ square slice sausage, etc. are not actually eaten, but are inventions of recent 'regional marketing effort(s)',rather than actual variations? What research is this based on? Hotel/b and b fare is no indication of what is eaten in the home. Typical anglocentricity: regional/ national variations are, we are led to believe, just deliberate aberrations from an original, standard English norm. Arrogant English reluctance to accept that not all the peoples of the UK are the same as them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.57.98 (talk) 13:52, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Since when have tomatoes been a traditional part of a full SCOTTISH breakfast? BTW, ENGLISH is in fact pertaining to the southern half or so of Great Britain (Big Island), whereas the full island or group of islands is BRITISH.2.125.67.48 (talk) 16:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)Lance Tyrell[reply]

Merger with variants

It's time to Be bold and merge these articles. I am also copying the Talk pages of the merged articles here. The arguments about the "time of day" the meal is eaten does not mean that the Ulster Fry is not a variety of the Full Breakfast. The arguments for not merging Bacon and Eggs were pretty incoherent. BOTH the Ulster Fry and the Bacon and Eggs were tagged as "stub-quality" articles. They weren't going to get any bigger. It all belongs here. Let's make THIS article into a first class culinary article. Boldly yours, -- Evertype·✆ 10:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good job! I agree fully with what you did. I just did some minor tweaking to reduce overlinking. --TimTay (talk) 10:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Are you going to complete the job now and blank other pages such as Ulster fry and put in a redirect to this article? --TimTay (talk) 10:37, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Working on that now. I have archived the Talk pages for Ulster Fry and Bacon and Eggs here on this discussion page as well. -- Evertype·✆ 10:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merges

I must say I disagree with some of these merges, especially the one of the Ulster Fry for several reasons.

  1. This has been discussed in the past, it's not a new thing, and no consensus to merge was ever reached so as a result I think the Be bold is maybe stretching it considering discussions have happens and this isn't a new thing.
  2. A proposal to merge was put on the talk page, then it was moved minutes later. If you start a section on proposals to merge then you should leave time for the discussion to happen, not just go ahead a couple of minutes later when no one has replied.
  3. The comment on the Ulster Fry merger proposal states "Depending on where it is served, it is called bacon and eggs; a fry, fry up, full English breakfast, full Irish breakfast, full Scottish breakfast, full Welsh breakfast or an Ulster fry." This is not supported and is actually an error in the Full breakfast article. There are no refs to support this claim, and the ref that is used is just for a recipe and makes no such claims to being a full breakfast, variant of a full breakfast or any other combination. Yes it mentions the word breakfast in the name but that's not what the ref is trying to support. Plus one recipe that mentions breakfast out of the thousands of possible supporting references is hardly representative.
  4. As has been pointed out before in various discussions, the Ulster Fry isn't necessarily a breakfast and isn't marketed, sold or otherwise as such. The claim has been made that places serve all day breakfasts to support putting it in, but that just seems faulty logic. The other items being referred to are and are commonly known as breakfasts, but are being served throughout the day, but the Ulster Fry isn't really a breakfast in the first place and doesn't claim to be. Steak and chips can be a breakfast item, but no one suggests putting it as an article on breakfasts. Canterbury Tail talk 13:37, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
None of the Full Breakfasts are necessarily eaten at breakfast time. Nevertheless all of these dishes or meals derive from the same source: a meal taken originally in the morning containing fried eggs and pork products with various other accompaniments. Both "Bacon and eggs" and "Ulster fry" were stub articles unlikely to grow in either size or quality. The interesting thing about these meals is their similarities and their differences, as well as their later geographic spread to North America and elsewhere. Although I put a proposal to merge, I quickly realized that I should have simply done the merger instead. The talk pages of all three articles consensus/non-consensus simply went round and round. The mealtime is not the salient feature which groups these meals together: is is the confluence of their ingredients. (Mealtime means little in a world where breakfast foods are available 24/7 in some restaurants.) All of these meals are "fries". Each is unique in having some ingredients that the others tend not to have. But I can think of only two reasons for not treating them all in one article. One is an accident of terminology.
Full Breakfast Fry
Full English Breakfast English Fry
Full Irish Breakfast Irish Fry
Full Scottish Breakfast Scottish Fry
Full Welsh Breakfast Welsh Fry
*Full Ulster Breakfast Ulster Fry
*Full American Breakfast Bacon and eggs :-)
It's accidental (not essential) that different terms are used for these meals or dishes. Their essential character is identical, however, which is why they should be treated in one article. Indeed, the entire Ulster Fry article was copied verbatim into this article and it serves simply to augment and improve the article and make it more interesting. The noble Ulster Fry is not "better off" in its own article. This article is better off for including it, however. And that brings us to the other reason I can think of for wanting Ulster Fry to be a separate article: Nationalism. Of course, Ulster diners should be proud of their cuisine. But that doesn't mean that in the context of an encyclopaedia the Ulster Fry is in its essence really different from these other fries. They are all fries, or, to use more formal language, they are all full breakfasts, at least in origin, and it is irrelevant (though very interesting!) if the Ulster Fry has evolved into a meal more often eaten at another time than first thing in the morning. There are, as you state, other breakfast meals with different ingredients, which would not belong in this article. The American Pancake Breakfast for instance, or Waffles or French Toast, all taken together in North America typically with Maple Syrup, would not belong here. The Fry or Full Breakfast evolved differently in England, the south of Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Ulster, and North America. I stand by the move, as I believe that the logic for the move is better than any reason not to have made it. -- Evertype·✆ 16:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have just added explanatory material at the top of the article regarding mealtime and the special development of the Ulster fry. -- Evertype·✆ 16:11, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've never heard this meal referred to as a "fry". A "fry-up" certainly, but never a "fry".

Exile (talk) 19:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"often used as a hangover cure due to its high grease content"

Is grease a hangover cure? If not, please delete this clause in the "Variants" section. Softlavender (talk) 04:43, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is. Try it... :-) Seriously, food and drink and vitamin B6 are all known to help, and the "greasy fry" is one of the most palatable ways of ingesting those when hungover. -- Evertype·✆ 09:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I remember reading an article on a major news site (think it was BBC) stating that bacon increases serotonin Fr levels too. Fried breakfast is widely well regarded as good for a hangover in the UK where we are all often in need of such devices... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.139.160 (talk) 12:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chips and beans with a boiled egg

Next to "Full English Breakfast" there is a picture of a concoction entitled "Chips and beans with a boiled egg", I'm English and have never heard of such a meal. Further up is a picture of a "Full Breakfast" (presumably English) which lists the ingedients: scrambled eggs, bacon, sausages, black pudding, mushrooms, baked beans, hash browns, and half a tomato. Scrambled eggs, baked beans and hash browns play no part in a Full English Breakfast although they may well be served in lower class hotels.Stutley (talk) 23:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed this picture because if there's one thing it isn't its a full English Breakfast. The contributor of the picture says it was his dinner! This article used to be about the Full English breakfast, now the Full English section is a couple of paragraphs of shite. Jooler (talk) 12:20, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse my French, but to me these previous comments seem to be a complete and utter basket of eggs! Where I am from a humble boiled egg, chips and beans are the key ingredients to a full English. Ask anyone in and around the Batley area and they will tell you the same. There may be fancy pants ingredients such as bacon and "lorn" (whatever that is!) but to most people boiled egg, chips and beans comprise the Holy Breakfast trinity!

After all, you know what they say... WHEN YOU WAKE UP FROM YOUR SLEEP A BOILED EGG IS WHAT YOU EAT CHIPS AND BEANS ARE WHAT GOES WITH IF YOUR DUTCH ADD SOME BUCKS FIZ

A traditional Yorkshire poem that shows what one should eat for breakfast to avoid the chagrin of a traditional yorkshire breakfast fan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.22.11.121 (talk) 00:58, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication

The part starting: "The meal was popularized in the United States by Edward Bernays "

is in the article twice. Wanderer57 (talk) 02:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another bit of duplication is the mentioning of "All Day Breakfast" twice in the "Tradition" section. Whilst "so good they named it twice" might be a reasonable rationale elsewhere, I'm not sure it is here. Anyway, just saying, if anybody less idle than me wants to fix it.--194.247.53.233 (talk) 20:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant

"Set six years later in Dublin of 1904, the opening of Ulysses by James Joyce contains a famous breakfast scene in which Leopold Bloom prepares and eats a fried pork kidney with bread and tea." What is the relevance of this? Stutley (talk) 13:25, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidently the breakfast scene is famous. -- Evertype·✆ 23:36, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It is a famous episode, and I am a huge fan of the novel, but the sentence is not relevant to this article. A single fried pork kidney is not a full cooked breakfast. On 16 June every year, Dublin has the Bloomsday festival to celebrate Joyce and his works, and many places offer a cooked breakfast which consists of all the things that Bloom is said in the book to enjoy (besides kidneys, he also liked fried liver, gizzards and cod's roe). This is entirely out of keeping with the book, since Bloom is not a heavy eater and would never eat all those things at the one sitting. But people just use it as an excuse to pig out. In any case, Ulysses has nothing much in common with a full breakfast and I will remove the sentence. Lexo (talk) 22:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Edward Bernays "bacon and eggs" reference from introduction, as it neither refers no, nor was intended to be connected to a full breakfast.Furrybarry (talk) 01:38, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

and i have restored it. it's referenced, is relevant (bacon and eggs are both components of a full breakfast), and is interesting. Kaini (talk) 02:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Irish breakfast

Who the hell wrote the bit about the full Irish breakfast? I can only assume it was an Irishman, from the quality of the English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.65.38.77 (talk) 13:44, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to make comments about the quality of other people's English:
1. Don't swear.
2. Don't bitch. You were too lazy to fix it yourself, so you should have kept your mouth shut.
3. Don't make offensive remarks and not sign them. That's the behaviour of a bigot and a coward. Lexo (talk) 22:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, you complain about the quality of the English and yet you fail to notice that the second half of your second sentence should have swapped places with the first half. Lexo (talk) 22:39, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

at its heart

I don't like that phrase, it seems to be more suited to a tabloid newspaper than wikipedia.

Any objections if I change it?

Also while I agree that bacon and eggs are traditional - I would suggest that in 2008 baked beans on toast are the "heart" of the breakfast.

The egg is debatable, due to the fact that it can be fried or scrambled.

Also I am vegetarian (as are lots of people in UK) and I love a greasy fry up - beans,toast,fried eggs,mushrooms,hash browns - it seems according to the article that this is not a full breakfast, due to its lack of bacon. Sennen goroshi (talk) 03:30, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

one of the difficulties of articles about such omni-present, yet highly variable and definitely non-sexy topics is to find reliable sources to support any statements or claims at all. But I definitely approve of the removal of the phrasing "at its heart" as being unencylopedic. -- The Red Pen of Doom 03:45, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would hope that until such time as someone objects to the content, that lack of sources might be overlooked. It is not the wikipedia way, but as long as there is no blatant OR I don't see any major issues if someone was to say "baked beans are a common ingredient of a full breakfast"
But I have a project, I live in Japan, I am going to see if I can find an English breakfast in Tokyo. Sennen goroshi (talk) 03:53, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is it really necessary to add details in articles like "vegetarian alternative exists" ?? Of course it does. There's a vegetarian alternative for everything. It's like saying "and if you don't like eating it, you can choose not to" or "there are some people in the world who have never heard of it" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 04:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

this article needs some brutal disambiguation

the original concern of this article was the traditional west european/north american/australian (with particular emphasis on the islands of england and ireland as originator, perhaps) breakfast of fried pork products with eggs and some optional extras. in other words, bacon, eggs, (sausages, [black|white] pudding, mushrooms, tomatoes) and less frequently (baked beans, fried bread, onions, and liver/kidneys).

what seems to have happened over the lifetime of the article is that the focus of the article has become fuzzier. it now incorporates 'a hearty or large breakfast' regardless of location. things like 'a full breakfast in south america' or 'a full breakfast in portugal' are interesting, but they have no place here - unless they concern fried pork products with eggs and some optional extras. in other words, bacon, eggs, (sausages, [black|white] pudding, mushrooms, tomatoes) and less frequently (baked beans, fried bread, onions, and liver/kidneys).

the article is, in spirit, about the classic and archetypical bacon and eggs breakfast dish. these things are the core of a fried breakfast. perhaps the best solution would be to move the page to one with a more descriptive name? --Kaini (talk) 23:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename it "Full Breakfast {Britain and Ireland)" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.139.160 (talk) 12:57, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tradition

(Moved: Put new text at the end of old text) Si Trew (talk) 09:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"...advertised as "Traditional English Breakfast", or "Traditional Irish Breakfast" and so on, but there is very little about them that is truly traditional in the historical sense, as they are for the most part, a twentieth century concoction.."

Because the current breakfast format is 20th century means that it isn't traditional? Who decides how old something needs to be to be a tradition? Surely the more important point is not the age, but the consensus of the people that cook it as to what a Full Breakfast is (which is dealt with very well in the preceding para by the way)? This is part of tradition in my book. This sentence doesn't have a reference, and to me is a bit misleading - it should be reworded. To some it might appear to be a disparaging comment on the heritage of the breakfast. Maybe something about "having evolved over the last hundred years" or something? Mammal4 (talk) 09:19, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree "traditional" is subjective. Stores of course tend to advertise "our traditional Xbox 360" or whatever, and it does seem to have subjective (positive or negative) overtones of "old-fashioned". I think "...over the last century" (or "hundred years", as preferred) is perfectly good. Si Trew (talk) 09:34, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

American Breakfast

I concur with the couple of other comments here that American pancakes are not part of this breakfast -- you can have a large breakfast that's centered around pancakes, but it's a completely separate thing from the country breakfast centered around eggs and greasy meats; one is an analog of the British full breakfast and reasonably included here, but the other isn't. I think there's one or two restaurant chains that offer minipancakes instead of toast or pastries to go with your bacon and eggs, but I wouldn't call that traditional. I'd really like to see a reference for the American section of this, as my reaction to it was "what alternative universe American South are they living in?" I've never seen that large a breakfast anywhere in the South but a restaurant pick-and-choose buffet. I know it says "some combination" rather than "all of the following", but you could add beef lo mein and turkey tetrazinni to the list and "some combination" would still be correct. I'd remove the gravy, pancakes, potato pancakes, pastries, and steak (it's certainly possible to have them for breakfast, but they're not part of the traditional fried-stuff combination) and clarify that only one or two meats are used per breakfast and that hash browns are breakfast potatoes. I'd also point out that scrapple, while traditional, is more often joked about than actually served these days (and is more Northern than Southern), and liver pudding is very localized; it may be traditional to a few areas, but certainly not to the South as a whole. I live in North Carolina right now and still had to follow the link to see what they were talking about! That said, it's been years since I hung around here regularly and I'm not happy editing anything subjective like that without knowing what codes you guys have developed in my absence, so I'll leave other folks to make any needed edits.Bedawyn (talk) 21:05, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, I'm not the only Southerner who's never heard of liver pudding for breakfast.Bedawyn (talk) 21:59, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The whole North American section is basically made up. There isn't anywhere in the US where walking into a restaurant and ordering a Full Breakfast will get you a specific thing that would be consistent from place to place. It doesn't make sense to try and pretend that something relevant in the UK and Europe applies to the US. Suppafly (talk) 16:11, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At hotels in a variety of countries outside the U.S. (esp. in Asia), I have often encountered what is called an "American breakfast" or "American breakfast buffet". It seems to be used at hotels as a generic term for a large breakfast buffet that includes bacon, eggs, potatoes, bread, fruit, coffee, juice, etc. – a generally large quantity and variety of US and/or Western-European-style food items. Indeed, I notice that "American breakfast" is a redirect to this article, which seems to show some acknowledgment of what the term ordinarily means. However, the article itself does not seem to really consider this usage (esp. in the lead section) and seems primarily to center around the UK. The lead section of the article says that this style of breakfast is "is especially popular in the UK and Ireland and in British cultures including Australia, New Zealand and South Africa" without mentioning the US at all. Large breakfasts are certainly also very common in the US, and probably no less common there than in the UK and British cultures. Personally, I believe most people don't think of the US as an especially "British culture", although obviously it could be interpreted as such. I've never seen the term "UK breakfast" or "English breakfast" or "European breakfast" – only "American breakfast". The use of the term seems especially common at hotels. I suggest that the lead part of the article should be modified in two ways:

  • To mention in some way that the full breakfast is also (very) common in the US, and
  • To mention that a full breakfast is often called "American breakfast" at hotels outside the US (esp. in Asia).

I wanted to mention this before just editing the article, because it might be interpreted as some sort of POV-motivated editing. However, I don't think it is POV to acknowlege this usage. See, for example, this definition. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:54, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looking around a bit further, I found that the term "English breakfast" is also sometimes used, and that there is an "English breakfast" redirect to this article. Accordingly, I edited the article to also mention this term. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:48, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My above-discussed addition of a mention of "American breakfast" was removed on 20 January 2013 without explanation. When I then added it back on 17 February 2013 (with a reference citation), my edit was quickly reverted by Dmol, who said "Most refs I found included pancakes and waffles, jelly, etc, which are not part of trad full breakfast". However, I suggest that the article should take a comprehensive view of what a full breakfast is, from a world-wide perspective. I think it should not focus exclusively on what was the UK historical tradition. —BarrelProof (talk) 23:26, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I feel it is good to have a world view, but the subject is very much aligned with the UK and Commonwealth where this type of breakfast is almost universal and very traditional. (ps- add Ireland to that list). As I mentioned earlier, an American breakfast includes other ingredients, those which I would consider almost representative of the USA. Perhaps we should mention that this type of breakfast is eaten in America with the addition of pancakes etc, but also that the term "American breakfast" seems to be limited to certain places outside of America. But I still think it is not common enough, nor is the term used sufficiently, to warrant a mention in the lede. --Dmol (talk) 06:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Authenticity

Having read all the misguided comments I think I'll go and make myself a full breakfast and stop reading about it. It makes me wonder if there is any consensus at all. Snoozebob (talk) 07:45, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Central American breakfast?

Not really sure if this entry needs a section on the big breakfasts of Guatemala. I'm half hispanic and half irish and I think I'm fit to judge this. The British Isles are famous for a big breakfast and every continental European I've met just shakes their head in wonder at the size of British and American breakfast servings. Starting off the day by eating enough food to choke a pig is not universal and this entry doesn't need a section for every country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.54.137 (talk) 22:00, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

yet more disambiguation needed (and not accepted)

English 'baked beans' is not the same as American or Canadian 'baked beans;' the latter is sweeter and is really a shorted name for 'Boston baked beans' or 'barbeque baked beans,' etc. North American readers should realize that the 'baked beans' in the UK fully breakfast section refers to something very similar to 'pork and beans.' In fact, the Heinz company provides much of the UK with their 'breakfast beans.' This is not original research, but is common knowledge to anybody familiar with both UK and North American cuisine. A short parenthetical phrase distinguishing between UK 'baked beans' and US 'baked beans' was needed, but erased by overzealous vandalism-ridders. Information of the sort is NOT vandalism and is NOT original research. It's common knowledge by a subset of people in the world... and their contributions informing the rest of the world is the entire point of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.146.172 (talk) 21:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

baked beans is a wikilink - if clicked, it will bring the reader to an article explaining exactly what they are. Kaini (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some common foods that aren't common at all

There's a few foods listed under the "Common foods and dishes" section which I'd argue have no place there.

French toast. I've never seen this as an accompaniment to a full breakfast, either in the U.K. or in the States.

English muffins or scones. I've never seen either as an accompaniment to a British or Irish full breakfast. In America, you'll occasionally see English muffins offered as an alternative to toast, but very rarely scones. "Biscuits" would be more appropriate.

Kippers. Offered at breakfast time as a meal in itself, but never as part of a "full breakfast".

Oatcakes. I've never seen these offered in any Scottish cafe, restaurant or hotel as an accompaniment to a fry-up.

If there's no objections, I'll strip all of these out shortly. Barry Wom (talk) 11:33, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess French toast is a side-dish offered in diners in the US. The US word "biscuit" means more or less the same thing as "scone". I would not delete English muffin though. But as this article is a monument to OR, I'd be careful about deleting stuff. -- Evertype·✆ 10:32, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've had a look at the list and have re-organized them by "type" so that the list makes more sense. I did not see kippers there. -- Evertype·✆ 10:40, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unless it's a regional variation, I've never seen French Toast offered as an side to a "full breakfast" in the US.
Agreed that an American Biscuit is very similar to a British Scone, but while the former is ubiquitous as an alternative to toast in the US, the latter is never seen in the UK.
I've stripped out kippers, french toast and scones. Oatcakes I've left in with a note that they're North Midlands specific. Barry Wom (talk) 16:11, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Smoked mackerel

Smoked mackerel (or kippers) are offered as an alternative to a full breakfast, not in addition to it. A google search for "full english breakfast mackerel" will indeed find guest houses which offer it on their menu - but on the first page of results alone the menu makes it clear that one or the other is offered.

The first citation provided is from 1861 and is out of date. Cuts of cold meat and game pies are no longer offered as part of a full breakfast either.

The second citation makes the suggestion that eating smoked mackerel as an alternative to a full breakfast would be a healthier option. Barry Wom (talk) 13:29, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say it's always an alternative, as a fillet of smoked mackerel (or kipper) can easily be added to a full breakfast upon one's choice. Also, as I've worked in catering for many years at many different restaurants, I always find grilled smoked mackerel on sale at the hot counter together will everything else in a full breakfast.
Under the 'Common foods and dishes' section, it says "Some of the foods that may be included in a full breakfast are:", not foods that are offered as an alternative. Can't a fillet of grilled smoked mackerel be included on one's plate?
The second reference i added says "Adding some smoked mackerel to your breakfast would boost your omega 3 levels", not eating it separately as an alternative. So I'd say broiled/grilled smoked mackerel/kipper would be appropriate for the list. Hiddenstranger (talk) 16:23, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you've worked in catering for many years, have you ever seen anyone have a plate of bacon, eggs, sausages, mushrooms, beans and smoked mackerel ? It would surely be a very odd choice.
The list includes anything that might be served on the same plate and I don't think mackerel comes under this criteria. There are plenty of other things that might be offered at a hotel breakfast buffet spread which wouldn't be expected to be listed on a hotel menu which offered a set plate breakfast (cheese, ham, fresh fruit, prunes, porridge, danish pastries etc.).
The second reference you added actually backs up my point by stating "The traditional full English breakfast is made up of eggs

(fried or scrambled), bacon, sausage, fried bread or hash browns, baked beans, mushrooms and tomatoes." It's not suggesting that smoked mackerel be added to this plate, it's suggesting a bunch of healthier alternatives. Barry Wom (talk) 12:42, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Full Cornish Breakfast

I'm not going to revert again, but I really think that this is excessive detail. Regarding Fooboo's edit summary when reverting me ('Reverted - Cornwall is a country Dublin is not') - I understand that it's a somewhat thorny issue, but officially Cornwall is a county within England, just as Dublin is a county (as well as a city) within Ireland. I could just as easily create a section differentiating a 'Full Galway Breakfast' from a 'Full Dublin Breakfast', but that would really open the floodgates to an absolutely huge article with lots of pointless ephemera in it. In addition to this the description of 'Cornish potato cakes' - well, those are just potato cakes, the same as the ones you get anywhere in the UK or Ireland. In fact the only 'real' difference is the addition of hogs pudding which is quite similar to black pudding as found elsewhere. Thoughts? Kaini (talk) 00:45, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. We're getting in to too much detail for what is basically the same thing. Unless it can be shown that Cornwall has a distinctly different breakfast, it should be removed. And, as Kaini correctly points out, Dublin is a county in Ireland, but that would not justify having a separate entry for a Dublin breakfast.--Dmol (talk) 02:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hog's pudding is nothing like black pudding, the only vague similarity is the shape. They are different in taste, colour, size, and texture. I get 116,000 hits on google for "Full Cornish Breakfast", but only 38,300 for "Full Welsh Breakfast", yet the only thing different about the Welsh one is the addition of Laverbread (the reference given doesn't even refer to breakfast). Indeed if you read this link, http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/tm_objectid=16289602&method=full&siteid=50082&headline=so-what-is-a--full-welsh-breakfast---name_page.html, you'll realise that it's not even a "traditional Welsh breakfast." 86.184.8.129 (talk) 11:21, 30 July 2012 (UTC) and reading the article again it would seem that the Scottish breakfast isn't that dissimilar to the Cornish one and the same arguments that you are trying to use could be used there as well: "In Scotland the full breakfast; as with others contains eggs, back bacon, link sausage, buttered toast, baked beans and tea or coffee. The breakfast is made Scottish by the addition of Scottish style black pudding, sliced sausage and tattie scones. It commonly also includes fried or grilled tomato and/or mushrooms and occasionally haggis, white pudding, fruit pudding or oatcakes. As with other breakfasts it has become more common, especially within the home, to grill the meats, puddings and tomatoes and to only fry the eggs and tattie scones." 86.184.8.129 (talk) 11:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. No results found for "Full Galway Breakfast" on Google 86.184.8.129 (talk) 11:55, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies, I meant white pudding, not black pudding. My feelings are that if the Scottish breakfast is similar (I would argue nearly identical) it should take precedence, as it's officially a country, not a county (or technically Duchy) like Cornwall is. So, my point stands. Kaini (talk) 12:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My two-pence worth (and not a comment as to whether this section should be included or not), but Hog's pudding is different to white pudding - in addition to offal, it is supposed to have pearl barley in it (barley and barely bread being Cornish staples back in the day). When you fry it, the grains brown and crack, giving an interesting texture - it's more like haggis in this respect. Also, Cornish potato cakes are not exactly like potato farls, or tattie scones - they contain more potato and have a lot of butter in them - the taste and texture is much richer. Small differences maybe, but differences none-the -less Mammal4 (talk) 15:48, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps - I'm merely going off the description given at the wiki article for Hogs pudding. Although for what it's worth I've had white pudding with pearl barley in it here in Ireland (typically sold as 'Clonakilty white pudding'), which perhaps further illustrates my point with regards to regional variations on the full breakfast. I'm going to ask for some input over at Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink so we can get a broader range of opinions on this. Kaini (talk) 19:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Probably a good idea. I've had the same white pudding whilst over in Cork, but I wouldn't call it Hog's pudding (the Clonakilty brand of black pudding incidently was the best I've ever had). Part of the problem I've always seen with this article is that it attempts to describe essentially the same thing from several different angles at once, rather like the Blind men and an elephant story. The full breakfast is in essence several items from a large basket of possible items, including many different types of sausage. Which items you might find on your plate will be influenced by location, but also but what happens to be available (Is it a scottish breakfast if I eat it in Glasgow, but it has no haggis?). Part of the charm of the full breakfast is that it is felxible - sausage and bacon yes, but whatever else is lying around in the fridge the morning after the night before is also fair game (so long as it's fried). A lot of these things are variations on the same idea, which is hardly surprising considering the similar climate and materials at hand across the British Isles (potato farls, tattie scones, potato cakes, or haggis, hog's pudding or white pudding). They are different in the sense that they might have some local personality, but lets face it, they are pretty much the same sort of thing. This is difficult to put into an article, as people feel very passionately about this sort of thing, and start to make it political. Personally, I think it would be better to scrap the regional variations sections, and have one section only, with a sort of venn diagram type of thing showing the common and different components of the different variants. I think this would quite neatly show both the differences, but crucially how similar each tasty variation is in terms of components. Mammal4 (talk) 20:21, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
With regards to your 'venn diagram' idea, I think it's a good one - however I seem to recall that the article had something quite similar to that a while ago, and it was subject to the inevitable 'list creep/spread' thing that's endemic to that sort of thing on wiki. And yes, Clonakilty black and white pudding is some tasty, tasty stuff :) Kaini (talk) 20:33, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cool - well when you discuss it with the food and drink lot, maybe mention it? I've had a fiddle with some of the citations as I had a spare minute - some of them are pretty crappy. Don't have time to go through them all now, but it might not be a bad idea for someone to check they are actually supporting what they say they are. Mammal4 (talk) 20:40, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

sorted out the dodgy refs and some WP:MOS stuff. Kaini (talk) 21:17, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nutrition?

I'd be interested in adding information about the nutritional profile (or lack thereof) of these breakfasts, if anyone has any. I'm not a dietician, but from what little I do know, I would fully expect anyone who spent their life eating the Irish breakfast described here, on a daily basis, to be dead by 50. If that is the Irish breakfast, I'm surprised that the Irish aren't extinct. ;)

60.240.17.168 (talk) 14:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

American Breakfast

Where I live (Thailand), cooked breakfasts in hotels are often referred to as American Breakfast (I suspect this applies to many other countries too). This article (Wikipedia as a whole?) seems to be strangely UK-centric. American Breakfast redirects here, yet this article is predominantly about UK/Irish breakfasts.

So come on US-folk, add some more details of what you guys eat in the mornings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.49.48.215 (talk) 22:52, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that the basis of a typical full American breakfast is essentially: eggs(usually fried or scrambled), meat(sausage, bacon or fried ham),hash browns(sometimes just fried potatoes), toast, orange juice or milk. Most common sides are: pancakes, french toast, biscuits and gravy, fruit, oatmeal or grits.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Full_breakfast&oldid=562924155"