Talk:Acquired taste

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Acquired taste:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
  • Cleanup : Do something about the horrible mess that is the examples section
  • Disambiguation : Specify that this article is about the biology of taste, and not about the colloquial use of the word "acquired taste" in contexts outside of the taste of food.
  • Expand : Neuroscience and evolutionary biology behind changes in perception (perhaps something similar to habituation?).
Priority 5

List of Acquired tastes or examples section[edit]

Why was the article list of acquired tastes removed? and the examples section removed? We need/want that information somewhere besides the history page —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

This is the exact same question I am asking myself right now, since I returned to this article BECAUSE I wanted to see this list I very well remember. The article is much improved, but sadly, the list is GONE! Is there any place except the history where I can still find it? -- (talk) 19:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Split article[edit]

The early history for this article can be found on list of acquired tastes which used to be named Acquired taste and which I moved before splitting the two articles. —mako 19:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)


There's very little here - should we just redirect it to taste? I've already added the entire content there, which was omitted up until now. The evolutionary biology aspects behind it interest me - I imagine this occurs in most animals, allowing them to avoid eating foods they are unfamiliar with. This is well documented in rats. Even so, as is the article doesn't warrant a separate page. Richard001 05:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, though the article didn't previously mention it, there are of course non-gustatory forms of 'acquired taste', such as appreciating music for example. Sadly I don't seem to be able to dig up any material on the subject at all - gustatory or otherwise. Richard001 07:23, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Fox example... ridiculous![edit]

Oh, for Pete's sake... the classic story of the fox and the "sour grapes" is in NO way an example of "acquired taste". First of all, sour grapes would likely be distasteful to ANYONE, which is why the fox chooses to believe that they are sour. Being unable to reach them, he obviously has NO WAY of knowing whether they are "too sour for his tastes"... he simply consoles himself with this imagined notion that they are sour. If anything, one could assume that given their appearance, the fox actually knew differently... it's unlikely he would have put forth so much effort to reach them if they did not appear and/or smell ripe, and therefore, sweet.

The citation doesn't belong in this article, because it is NOT an example of the subject. I'm just too lazy, er, respectful to remove it myself. Um... there's probably nobody reading the article, anyway. ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxVolume (talkcontribs) 20:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

It would probably have been easier to remove the item than to type all this. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 22:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes, but unlike most people who edit Wikipedia, I don't consider myself to be a dictator of what should and shouldn't be here. I simply wanted to get my point across, and leave it open for debate. As a matter of fact, the biggest reason is that I personally don't care what gets posted in most articles. I just happen across articles from time to time that I feel compelled to express my opinion on, and unless I'm completely bored (like now), I may never revisit the discussion unless someone posts directly on my talk page. It would be nice if someone (preferably the person who posted it to begin with) would remove that example, but as for me, there are a lot more articles that I find both more interesting and more important. MaxVolume (talk) 22:17, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
It looks like somebody actually did remove it last month, so the problem is solved now, isn't it? Looie496 (talk) 22:33, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Most of the page gone[edit]

What has happened here? I usually advice people to read this article when talking about olives and wine, and now when I go in just a small part of the beautiful article is here.. Sad.. The edit nazis should improve by re-writing and writing More, not just remove things. /Luke

Well, when a significant portion of an article is complete crap written by someone who doesn't fully understand the subject of said article, no rewriting in the world will save it. Like a surgeon, sometimes we have to cut in order to cure. MaxVolume (talk) 17:47, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
This article was far more entertaining when there were a lot of examples of food usually described as "acquired tastes", it was delightful to follow the links to learn of strange food around the world. Now it's just plain boring. Don't get too serious now, let there be room for a little smile. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:16, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not about entertainment. Fun is encouraged, but not integral: this is an encyclopedia. Feel free to make any of the edits you suggested and wait to see if they withstand peer review. As it stands, this article is borderline crap and seriously needs some help from authoritative sources, a sommelier, perhaps, or a food critic who does this sort of thing for a living. If you feel up to the challenge, please contribute. Yabopomonofonomopo bay (talk) 08:22, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Awkward and amateurishly written[edit]

"The risk in this acting is that it can lead to all sorts of excesses such as self-deception and pretentiousness." Or poorly composed articles that sound like they were written by an eighth grader, with bogus citations. Why not say that it is important to remain objective and honest while adjusting one's tastes, and not to claim to enjoy something simply to impress others? (talk) 02:18, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Both are moral judgements. Both are unacceptable on Wikipedia. Also, I don't think the source would hold up to much scrutiny, especially considering its charged and inflammatory language and repeated use of the word "bullshit", so I'm just going to go ahead and remove the statement and its cronies from both its locations in the article. It's bothering me, too. Yabopomonofonomopo bay (talk) 08:16, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

That's done, but I must have read the article or one of its sections twice, I only had to remove one instance. I really wish someone would blank this page and rewrite the whole damn thing. Yabopomonofonomopo bay (talk) 08:45, 17 June 2013 (UTC)


Seriously? and root beer? But no oysters? This page needs adult help. (talk) 03:42, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

And no mention of smoking? I agree. Paul Magnussen (talk) 17:14, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Here's a potential source to cite?[edit] This article seems to be worth checking out. I couldn't find anything factual on Acquired taste, but this article might be a starting point to base an article around? Skiingxmoose (talk) 19:34, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Oxford English Dictionary Definition[edit]

The OED defines Acquired taste as, "acquired taste n. a liking gained gradually, through experience or repeated exposure; (hence) a person who or thing which is not immediately appealing, but which one comes to enjoy or appreciate over a period of time." ("acquired, adj." OED Online. Oxford University Press, December 2014. Web. 2 March 2015.)

This should be worked into the intro. Skiingxmoose (talk) 21:52, 2 March 2015 (UTC)