From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Cappucino name[edit]

Someone else wrote:

Capucin Monks discovered the stimulating effects.

I don't know if this is true, however the name for the cappuccino drink probably derives from the similarity between the drink's appearance and the Capucin Monks' habit.

(The above looks like an old wives tale to me. --hajhouse)

It is: "cappuccino" means little hat (from whence the name of the Friars, whose habit has a little part of cloth for the head), but this is related with the upper beige cream, which is a sort of little hat put over a coffee. Other less elegant jokes refer to condoms, recalled as different... hats, so be aware that in Italy this word has two meanings.


16 tonnes per hectare seems very high compared to what I get on Google searches for "coffee tonnes hectare" or "coffee pounds acre". Most results are an order of magnitude lower. Maybe that figure refers to raw fruit and the usual way of quoting it is in tonnes of milled beans? --Michael Shields 18:43, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)


Could somebody check the bits of coffee history in Pedro Páez and Talk:Battle of Vienna?

Drink vs plant[edit]

I'm confused by this page. Shouldn't it be talking about coffee as a drink, rather than a plant? And why doesn't it mention espresso, lattes, mocha, etc.? -Adrian.

IMHO this page ought to be named Coffee (plant) and there should also be a Coffee (drink) with Coffee being a disambig page. I promised my wife I wouldn't let Wikipedia be an infinite time sink at least until I get some other things out of the way, but maybe some day I can work on that. Cheers, ;Bear 17:22, 2004 Apr 14 (UTC)

Not sure it needs a disambig page because they are sort of the same thing. This deals mostly with the plant, all it needs is a link to Coffee (drink) and some info adding there. Some links for me or whoever creates such a page: Instant_coffee café Espresso Coffeehouse Drink

Since Coffee (drink) now exists, I've moved over the relevant chunks. Markalexander100 20:06, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Espresso vs Expresso[edit]

Very interesting. Somebody put in an empty headline about "Espresso is the correct spelling, not expresso" and I was in the middle of commenting on that and then somebody else took it out. Here's my comment anyway:

I think "expresso" might be a good name for those little steam toys; my wife has one and insists on calling it her expresso machine, and since it's not a REAL espresso machine with a pump, I've thus far refrained from disabusing her of that pronunciation. ;Bear 21:24, 2004 Jun 16 (UTC)


I added a few words, correcting the part that was telling that coffee is produced on tropical countries for temperate countries. Thats not true. People in tropical countries also drink coffee. Actually Brazil is one of the biggest consummers of it. Dionisiofranca 10:22, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Sorry to Bother[edit]

Would anyone be at all able to tell me how long coffee has been available in cup form? It's a long story. -- Nobody Important, Dec 3.


I moved this page from "Coffee (plant)" to "Coffea" for several reasons. I believe this article was at the original page due to the "common name" rule. There are several problems: I do not believe "coffee plant" is more common than "Coffea". Secondly, common rule is adhered to to make a page easy to find - but this was disambiguated anyway! Thus, I moved it to a more common name that did not need disambiguation. --Oldak Quill 23:34, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Chemistry section[edit]

The section reads like someone's chemistry paper. ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Chemistry section: Chemistry green coffee bean[edit]

it is a paper on the chemistry of green coffee; that is what the head line says and what we want.

Chemistry section: tone and language[edit]

I am the author of this section with the background of patents regarding coffea. There are more than 1800 patents world wide regarding coffea. To my opinion it is important to present that specific, 3rd grade literature, hidden in specific database, to the reader. To make it clear, the article doese not cite primary sources. If an english native speaker with scientific background can get it better I appreciate it. But please do not evaporate the intellectual property of our friends from the coffea growing countries!