Talk:Cookie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Food and drink (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
 

Rare alternate spelling[edit]

The original (American) English spelling of the Dutch word was "kookie" and was still commonly seen well into the 1960's. We had two cookie jars, in fact; a barrel-shaped white and blue one that said "Cookies" and a rectangular one, designed like a townhouse, with the word "Kookies" on it.

The spelling "cookie" appears to have taken over in the 1970's. I have not seen "kookie" jars since then; only "cookie" jars.

Likewise, there used to be two ways to spell the American tomato-based version of a Southeast-Asian fish sauce called "cat siop": Catsup (pronounced "catch-up") was closer to the original Malaysian word (obviously) and was presumably the original spelling. This spelling was still seen in the 1960's (as were television commercials with Fred McMurray selling Hunt's "catsup"), but has long since been replaced by the newer spelling, ketchup.

71.198.146.98 (talk) 23:22, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

This sounds interesting but I'd like to see some evidence of that usage. I just consulted a couple of etymology sources which show "cookie" as early 18th Century and no mention or "kookie". Looking through google news articles and google books (1900-1970) I see no mention of kookie but thousands for cookie. Searching for "kookie jar" only turns up Lolcats. If this was the common spelling of a common word, finding usage would be easy. I wonder if your kookie jar was very regional or perhaps just a pun on the word "kooky". --JGGardiner (talk) 21:01, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

What about "cooky" vs "cookie"? It appears American English switched to "cookie" in the 1960s, however I'd like to see more information about this. Kevink707 (talk) 17:16, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Scottish meaning of cookie[edit]

I am 38 and Scottish and I've never heard of the supposed Scottish meaning of cookie being a plain bun before, whatever Brittania Online says - given the source I would guess that it was probably once common usage in some part of Scotland at least, but it certainly isn't so now, unless it's used by older people in secret when there's no-one younger within earshot. The only usage I am aware of here is the same as that in England, which is that it is used as part of the name of certain types of 'biscuit' (as we call them) which were partly marketed on their 'American-ness' when introduced here, such as the 'chocolate chip cookie'. Scatterkeir (talk) 23:43, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I am also Scottish and have never heard cookies being buns, to me cookies are chocolate chipped cookies.--92.41.169.117 (talk) 20:56, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I am another Scottish reader who has also never heard the term 'cookie' used for a bun. I have also asked my family members who also have never heard the word cookie being used for a bun. Cookie means a chocolate chip cookie to me aswell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.101.90 (talk) 00:17, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I am yet another Scottish reader (from Fife) and we used the word all the time when I was wee - usually referring to a selection of buns made using yeast, scones of various kinds, etc, ie generally not including fancy cakes - although it has to be said that was some time ago.81.149.39.214 (talk) 08:31, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Consensus is that a cookie is not a "plain bun". User 81.149.39.214 stated, "that was some time ago. Consensus however, is not a determining factor. Lacking any references for historical mention or references of "current" use the issue is self settled. Otr500 (talk) 00:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Round shape[edit]

fake and —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.10.27.11 (talk) 16:27, 30 August 2010 (UTC)




Why is it specified that cookies are "always round"? This seems quite odd to me because cookies come in innumerable shapes, that's what we have cookie cutters for, and don't tell me you've never seen square cookies cut from a sheet before. -- 65.6.62.47 (talk) 14:24, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Weird. I have almost a hundred cookie cutters in a drawer, and very few of them are round. I wonder what the editor would have made of gingerbread men. (Hmm: that change was made by a person that appears to have been cited repeatedly for vandalism, so perhaps it was deliberate nonsense.)
Thanks to User:Rmhermen for fixing it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:10, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I would just like to throw out that it was indeed deliberate nonsense, the IP is that of a highschool, so it would make sense that it is repeatedly cited for vandalism. Anyway, thanks for changing it back, I hope you don't get any more trouble from them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.145.108.229 (talk) 06:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I was just getting the munchies and i had a thought. I wanted to know where cookies came from. This web site great!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.153.38.34 (talk) 00:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

KK I totally think u r so right. And yea i have seen square-ular cookies b4. U ROCK!! from ROXI! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.109.12 (talk) 00:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Source[edit]

There's an effort to develop a definition for cookie here that might be a useful source for this article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:10, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Smarties?[edit]

In the United Kingdom the term cookie often just refers to chocolate chip cookies or a variation (e.g. cookies containing oats, Smarties)

I know of no one that would call smarties either a cookies or biscuits, its a chocolate snack, or do i need to meet new people?62.30.54.79 (talk) 23:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

The article is referring to cookies that contain Smarties, rather than Smarties themselves. AJCham2097 (talk) 05:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

That sense of 'cookie' in the UK tends to refer to a certain type of huge 'biscuit'/'cookie' which is sold in a bag rather than a packet due to the size, and which are softer than the 'biscuits' we normally have. The bag would contain perhaps around three of these cookies, compared to maybe twenty much smaller biscuits in a packet. The Smarties cookies are an example of these. Scatterkeir (talk) 23:47, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I know it's original research, and we get told off for that here, but I recall seeing both the small cookies and the large cookies, which can vary from being softer/the same/ or harder than a biscuit. Generally, cookies are the things with "bits" in (chocolate chips, "Smarties", fruit and such like) where as (sweet) biscuits are the ones with nothing in or some kind of topping (e.g. chocolate). --91.105.75.183 (talk) 22:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Oils vs. Fats[edit]

I can't edit this article in its current protected state. But I have a thought that a particular part of the "Description" section is worded a bit inaccurately.

A general theory of cookies may be formulated this way. Despite its descent from cakes and other sweetened breads, the cookie in almost all its forms has abandoned water as a medium for cohesion. Water in cakes serves to make the base (in the case of cakes called "batter"[2]) as thin as possible, which allows the bubbles – responsible for a cake's fluffiness – to form better. In the cookie, the agent of cohesion has become some form of oil. Oils, whether they be in the form of butter, egg yolks, vegetable oils or lard are much more viscous than water and evaporate freely at a much higher temperature than water. Thus a cake made with butter or eggs instead of water is far denser after removal from the oven.

Oils in baked cakes do not behave as soda in the finished result. Rather than evaporating and thickening the mixture, they remain, saturating the bubbles of escaped gases from what little water there might have been in the eggs, if added, and the carbon dioxide released by heating the baking powder. This saturation produces the most texturally attractive feature of the cookie, and indeed all fried foods: crispness saturated with a moisture (namely oil) that does not sink into it.

This is a great description for a cookie, but I don't think it's proper to say that the agent of cohesion is "some form of oil." Butter, egg yolks, liquid oil, and lard are all mentioned as forms of oil. I have never heard of this before. From what I've seen, both in a culinary and a nutritional sense, these items are usually referred to as "fats."

I think most people will interpret oil as only those fat-based items that are fully liquid at room temperature. And I don't think oil, under that definition, is used in cookies very much at all. If I'm not mistaken, that would make a very flat, greasy cookie. Many cookies, at least the ones familiar to me as an American, rely heavily on a mixture of butter and sugar that has been "creamed."

So, what I'm saying is, I think in the quoted section, nearly every instance of "oil" should be replaced with "fat." I'd do it myself if I could.

Vanillatoast (talk) 22:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I think you are correct; these substances are generally called "fats", not "oils".
My complaint with this article goes a little deeper. Looking at the last two paragraphs of the "Description" section, which begin with "A general theory of cookies may be formulated this way", one question springs to mind: Who formulated a "general theory of cookies" this way? If it was the author, then these two paragraphs represent Original Research and violate a major Wikipedia policy. If it was some published authority, other than the author, the article should cite that authority to enable independent verification.
yoyo (talk) 12:53, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
could one site the ingredients label on a packet of cookies? or... a cook book? I guess i'll have to crack open a cook book and find a citation of what defines a cookie. or elves in a tree, whichever is more convenient. Vinithehat (talk) 01:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

It's pretty dreadful writing—and I cringe every time I see someone use phrases like "namely," or "in all honesty..." on Wikipedia. The fact that these questions/suggestions above have been ignored for seven years really disappoints me. 2601:140:8302:E260:40D1:A979:1B44:2C3 (talk) 02:01, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

citations?[edit]

the only citations in this article are for britannica and merriam-webster. Neither of which go into any kind of detail like the article does. There's some good data here, but where'd it come from? Pete Iriarte (talk) 01:37, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

A standardized definition of the term cookie is needed.....[edit]

because it is critical with the coverage and exclusion of the cereal-based products--222.64.20.206 (talk) 22:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

A topic of....[edit]

List of cookie brands is needed--222.64.20.206 (talk) 22:26, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Come up with some text, and we'll see. Mintrick (talk) 22:42, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


Fried things are not cookies[edit]

Krusticki and rosettes are NOT cookies. Theyre at best a pastry. Calling these things cookies would mean that funnel cakes and zeppoles are also cookies, they are not. The way they are made cotradicts the definition of cookies on this page as well as on their respective pages (ex: for rosettes, they are defined as a pastry made with a batter). removal of this "type" of cookie should be considered. If one simply fries cookie dough, that is not a cookie, just as if you boiled a potato it does not make chips. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinithehat (talkcontribs) 03:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I removed the fried cookies. Vinithehat (talk) 19:15, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Inconsistency in the origins[edit]

The information box at the top of the page says that cookies are originally from the USA and Canada, but the section on origins describes how they actually originated in seventh century Persia as well as the path that eventually took them to North America.

I'm far from an expert in cookies, but it's obvious that the information in one of these parts is incorrect (probably the info box). Can someone who actually knows about this verify the information and make the necessary changes, please? 75.64.204.13 (talk) 07:39, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Strange Definition[edit]

Wikipedia: "a cookie is a small, flat-baked treat, containing milk, flour, eggs, and sugar, etc."

1. A "treat"? That's very subjective. In the Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, a cookie is not a treat but a small cake: it is "a small flat or slightly raised cake".

2. Cookies don't always contain milk and egg. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.205.199.190 (talk) 19:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I thought "milk" was especially odd. I know of few American cookie recipes that include milk as a crucial ingredient. Butter/shortening is much more ubiquitous. Poiuyt Man talk 08:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Cookies are also known as a Candy or a sweet snack.

Cookies versus biscuits[edit]

I concur with the last statement that for some countries cookies are distinct products from biscuits. In Australia the view is similar to that in the UK in that cookies are a distinctly American product, unlike biscuits. In Australia, cookies are viewed as being softer in texture and often much larger, whereas biscuits are generally harder.

There is an iconic Australian biscuit company, called Arnotts, which was taken over by the American Campbells soup company in 1997. Australian's were so parochial about Arnott's biscuit line that at the time, there was a significant concern that the American parent company would change Arnott's biscuit product line into a cookie line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bagasseman (talkcontribs) 16:24, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

"The term Biscuit to describe the Cookie has been the cause of debate. In the UK, it is commonly viewed that a 'biscuit' and 'cookie' are two different classifications, not to be used to describe the same food type. [citation needed] In the United Kingdom the term cookie often just refers to chocolate chip cookies or a variation (e.g. cookies containing oats, Smarties)."

This section was recently removed from the article as unsupported. Is there any truth to it? Rmhermen (talk) 04:03, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I for one am finding it very difficult to find a definition of what a UK Cookie is to provide evidence, but I wouldn't say it was a different classification to a biscuit - it IS a biscuit! In England, a Cookies is a 'type' of biscuit, just as Digestive, Bourbon, Custard Cream and Shortbread is a type of biscuit, albeit a type that comes in a variety of 'fillings' and flavours (usuallly, but not limited to, chocolate chips and/or nuts). They tend to have a 'lighter' (and more absorbant!) texture to many other types of biscuit, and come in a variety of sizes - and pretty much always look something like the cookie seen in the main picture. They are of course NOT defined by how they are packaged, as was implied elsewhere, and many mass-produced brand name cookies are packaged just like other biscuits. Unlike the (often larger) 'fresh baked' cookies you can buy at specialist stores and stalls, which are often soft and/or chewy on the inside inside, mass market cookies are harder and 'crispier'. Opwerty (talk) 18:49, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I must also add that in the British English, or rather more so in the United Kingdom, there is a difference between a cookie and a biscuit and I believe this should be stated on the page. (Jme Saunders (talk) 14:35, 3 May 2011 (UTC))

Is there a 3rd party source that explains the difference?!!!!


As some one who lives in theUnited Kingdom, I have always taken the term "cookie" to be the word in American English for what we call "biscuit". ACEOREVIVED (talk) 23:14, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. I would also like to know when the term cookie came into general use to refer to any biscuit. Nabisco or 'National Biscuit Company' in New Jersey, USA was established in the late 19th Century. They obviously still used the term biscuit for a hard biscuit or cracker product. So when and why did it change...? J.P.Lon (talk) 14:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

As someone who lives in South Africa, I can say that the statement regarding the meaning of the word cookie in South African English is false - it is not used to refer to cupcakes at all. I can only surmise that the confusion arose because koek is Afrikaans for cake, and thus koekie, the dimunitive form, could be used to refer to a cupcake. However, koekie does not translate to cookie, thus this statement is false. I think there is little distinction in South African English between biscuit and cookie as far as I am aware. Ancalagon ZA (talk) 13:13, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Since the statement was also unsourced, I have taken the liberty of deleting it. --Saddhiyama (talk) 13:50, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

pictures[edit]

if you need pictures for decorated cookies, you can use any from here http://sparklesugar.blogspot.com/ <-- my site. sorry, i dont have an account here to log in properly... cheers! ~katie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.206.189.6 (talk) 20:39, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

thanks? Vinithehat (talk) 14:21, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
You will have to give permession in the Wikipedia Commons for us to use them. PlantRunner (talk) 00:49, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

"Nice" not "nice"[edit]

For greater clarification, if nothing else, can I suggest that the caption for the NICE biscuit reads "A Nice British biscuit" rather than "A nice British biscuit" - note the capitalised 'N' - as this is the name of the biscuit (possibly pronounced 'neece'), not a description of its (subjective) tastyness! I'd change it myself, but I've only just joined and the page is protected! Opwerty (talk) 18:59, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

thanks for pointing that out. hopefully the new caption will allow for little speculation.Vinithehat (talk) 02:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Cookie is a cake.--SuperLarreh (talk) 22:18, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

indeed, it is not. ViniTheHat (talk) 20:06, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


WP:NOTLINK, or not?[edit]

Why are we listing manufacturers and brands? While I see that these lists are all to WP articles, it seems out of the spirit of WP:NOTLINK (item 2). I don't see any benefit to WP of having a "List of cookie manufacturers" (i.e. a stand-alone list). As an alternative, if anyone sees value in retaining this information in a more objective way, should we update the company- and brand-articles with categories like Cookie manufacturers and Cookie brands? We do, after all, have similarly specific categories like Chocolatiers and Post Foods brands.  ◉ ghoti 15:56, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 24 July 2012[edit]

Cellan's head looks like a cookie.

80.229.34.116 (talk) 15:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done: ... Floating Boat (the editor formerly known as AndieM) 15:46, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
That is very funny but serious. As Wikipedia is not the appropriate place to crack jokes, we need take action to avoid this kind of activity, and hence I highly suggest that we move this page to avoid confusion - <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 14:26, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

why cookie?[edit]

why is the vandalized and locked??? its just a cookie guys184.98.114.65 (talk) 21:42, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Australian Usage[edit]

Why, in the introduction, is Australia grouped with the United States and Canada? Use of the term in Australia is limited in approximately the same way as in the United Kingdom; a "cookie" is a type of biscuit. 121.45.50.178 (talk) 03:54, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, in Australia cookies are referred to as biscuits. Australia should be grouped with the UK, not the US and Canada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.108.125.16 (talk) 14:15, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Pointless links[edit]

Oatmeal cookie linked from Cookie redirects back to Cookie, which is not only useless but annoying and probably harmful,

  • users click the link and gain nothing of value. I wanted to read about oatmeal cookies, not read about cookies in general *again*.
  • the only mention of Oatmeal cookie in the article is in that very link
  • someone preparing new articles, seeing the link in blue, and not in red may deem it unnecessary to make an "Oatmeal cookie" article as "there is one already". Or alternatively struggle with removing the redirect before writing. (they are surprisingly tenacious against new user attacks - creating a new page is far easier than unwinding a redirect.)

176.115.25.102 (talk) 00:55, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I've removed those. Tayste (edits) 01:32, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

The English Wikipedia is a international wiki![edit]

This article is written like it is directed at people from Anglo-America. For example 'In the United Kingdom, a cookie is referred to as a biscuit...' is suggesting that the reader is from Anglo-America, it should be written like 'In the United Kingdom, what an American or Canadian would call a cookie is referred to as a biscuit...'. The entire article is written in this way, i recommend either renaming the article 'Cookie (US and Canada)' and possibly creating another article for what other English speaking countries use or correcting the article so that it takes into account other English Speaking countries definitions and is not directed at Anglo-Americans.

Thanks, WheelerRob (talk) 15:59, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree here; while for various reasons that have been discussed to death the article should remain titled "cookie", the wording of the article as a whole does not reflect its purpose as an international wiki (though the section the comment above was referring to, I think, has now been altered). For example the use of the word "treat": typing "define treat" into Google specifies it as a N. American word for this type of thing rather than a universally-understood one. Though it's obvious what it means, it still reads a bit awkwardly for those not from NA. Marjoram90 (talk) 21:03, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Hebrew interwiki link[edit]

hello, i am from th hebrew wiki, and i have noticied that that artical is turning me to the hebrew articel about chocleta chip cookie,because the protection, i can not fix this, please, help. 109.186.134.184 (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

I believe I fixed that - the correct link was in the text but commented out for some reason. Rmhermen (talk) 19:44, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Misleading Introduction[edit]

In the United Kingdom a cookie is a small, flat, baked treat, usually containing fat, flour, eggs and sugar. 'Cookie' however is usaully used to describe Drop cookies exclusively. I'm going to modified the introduction to make it alternative definitions clear. Thanks, Rob (talk) 01:58, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit terminology[edit]

To change, '...including the United Kingdom, the most common word for this type of treat is biscuit and the term cookie is often used to describe only certain types of cookies.' to, '...including the United Kingdom, the most common word for this type of treat is biscuit and the term cookie is often used to describe only certain types of biscuits.'

Done. Rmhermen (talk) 17:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

German Wikipedia link[edit]

Moved to Wikidata interwiki conflicts: Anon126 (talk - contribs) 20:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Here: -> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pl%C3%A4tzchen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.33.92.87 (talk) 23:27, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Bit of a difficulty. American English refers to them all as cookies while British English calls most biscuits. German Keks links to our biscuit article while the German Platzchen links to Afrikaans Platzchen which seems to mean only Christmas cookies. So without knowing which particular products German calls Platzchen it isn't clear what the links should be. I would think both cookie and biscuit should link to both Kek and Platzchen but Wikidata only allows one to one links (I think). Rmhermen (talk) 07:09, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
I came here to question the exact same thing for Español. This article points to es:Galleta con chispas de chocolate, which of course is chocolate cookie. The article es:Galleta points back to en:Cookie, but because en:Biscuit points to es:Galleta already, I don't quite know what to do. (And, amusingly enough, the same picture is used in Cookie and es:Galleta.) --jpgordon::==( o ) 04:57, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

move this page to avoid confusion (March 2015)[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 16:50, 12 March 2015 (UTC)


CookieCookie (baked goods) – because its usage is almost common to that of HTTP cookie and they both should be disambiguated appropriately. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 14:26, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose on obvious long-term significance grounds. Confusion is unlikely. Egsan Bacon (talk) 15:11, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose: This article is about the food. For the computer terms, see... does the job nicely. Jonathunder (talk) 16:02, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Clear primary topic. Rmhermen (talk) 16:05, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per apple Red Slash 18:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per everyone else. No evidence has been provided that HTTP cookie is about equally as common as the food.--67.68.30.108 (talk) 22:20, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
It should also be noted that this is a bit like the case with Avatar. In that case the primary meaning was determined to be the deity despite the fact that there was a popular film of the same name and a well known computing term. Granted the food is not on the same level as a deity but it does show that there is precedence for historical significance to be considered above modern usage.--67.68.30.108 (talk) 22:30, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose in cases when things are named after other things, it seems wrong for the other things to be disadvantaged. GregKaye 23:50, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per apple and mustang among others. -- Calidum 00:44, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose WP:SYSTEMATICBIAS ; clearly not evaluating usage outside the internet, or outside the field of internet software (I find it weird this discussion started inside a joke edit request that was closed 3 years ago; April 1 is still a month away) -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Classic WP:BIAS example. —  AjaxSmack  05:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The baked thingie is still the clear primary topic, even if it is a weird way of saying biscuit... -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Semi-protected edit request on 24 May 2015[edit]

Studys show that 100% of people LOVE cookies 98.213.232.107 (talk) 21:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. And besides, I doubt that everybody likes cookies. Finding just one person who doesn't would refute that statement! Altamel (talk) 21:53, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Needs improving![edit]

Dear fellow wikipedians and unregistered users, The article cookie does not show a worldwide view of this article. Improve this please! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.174.138.220 (talk) 22:14, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

History and etymology of cookie[edit]

I've been doing some reading and it seems to me that the word "cookie" only became dominant in North America during the 20th century - Nabisco, the National Biscuit Company, is a prime example of this. In 1890 everyone knew a biscuit was a crunchy snack, whereas now Nabisco describes itself as a manufacturer of cookies. Anyone else spotted this or know any more about the history of the word? Gymnophoria (talk) 18:26, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

The word "cookie" appears in the first American cookbook in 1796.[1] Rmhermen (talk) 01:01, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

MISLEADING.[edit]

MOST OF THE PHOTOS ON THIS PAGE ARE BISCUITS.

Nope. No biscuits on that page.
Runny hunny.jpg
Rmhermen (talk) 02:01, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 April 2016[edit]

I want to edit the restaurants that serve cookies Meapmeep (talk) 22:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — JJMC89(T·C) 03:09, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

edit request[edit]

Can we clean this up "In most English-speaking countries except for the US and Canada, crisp cookies are called biscuits. Chewier biscuits are sometimes called cookies even in the UK.[2] Some cookies may also be named by their shape, such as date squares or bars.

Cookies or biscuits may be mass-produced in factories, made in small bakeries or home-made. Biscuit or cookie variants include sandwich biscuits such as Custard creams, Jammy Dodgers, Bourbons and Oreos, marshmallow or jam and dipping the cookie in chocolate or another sweet coating"

to be consistent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:C07:1488:8B84:6989 (talk) 09:03, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

The article should be labelled 'Biscuit', not Cookie[edit]

The wiki says that 'In most English-speaking countries except for the US and Canada, crisp cookies are called biscuits' - so if in all other English speaking countries 'cookies' are called biscuits then surely the US & Canada are exceptions? Therefore it doesn't make much sense that the article's title is the exception. Surely the article should be titled Biscuit instead? Yes, there is already another article labelled 'Biscuit' for the American baked good, but can't we simply relabel that page 'Biscuit (American baked good)' or something similar? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.169.138.146 (talk) 15:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Actually the biscuit article is mostly about those kind of item while the biscuit (bread) article is about the American kind. This article is about all cookies - both hard and soft. The article here also note that the soft ones are called cookies in many places that otherwise use biscuit. Rmhermen (talk) 21:55, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Actually, because of the fact that the US has such a larger population than all other English-speaking countries in the world, if one analyzes it from the perspective of "number of native English speakers in the world who think X", it's clearly America in the lead, given that 62% of all native English speakers on the planet ARE American.
Sorry, UK. You need to make a lot more babies to win this argument, I'm afraid... :P "Just lay back, and think of England", indeed!
i agree that it should still be called "Cookie." Even though disambiguation pages can and should handle this controversy.
Just a point of information. There are more English speakers in China than any other country. Maybe even than the rest of the world. I see that the wikipedia article on the subject differs with me. Just sayin'... 7&6=thirteen () 21:35, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
I anticipated this line of reasoning, which is why I was very careful to insert the word "native" speaker. Sadly, you were less careful in reading it, though! ;) Just sayin'... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.59.44.65 (talk) 21:39, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Also, there aren't nearly that many speakers of English in China, for the record. Most people who claim it are just doing it to be trendy or because it's something that they think reflects well upon them or their employer, etc. The vast, overwhelming majority of them are not actually conversant in the language. I guarantee you that Germany has more actual fluent English speakers than China does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.59.44.65 (talk) 21:41, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
(for reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_English-speaking_population )

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2017[edit]

Change "that is small, flat and sweet" to "that is small, flat, generally round and squishy in the middle". Adeelabdullah (talk) 15:48, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Not done: Not always true, and "squishy" is a terrible adjective for the lead sentence of an encyclopedia article. —KuyaBriBriTalk 17:18, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Unnecessary statement?[edit]

"Cookies or biscuits may be mass-produced in factories, made in small bakeries or homemade." As opposed to what? One could substitute the word cookie in that sentence with practically any other English noun describing any baked good. It's not a unique statement that applies to a limited number of them. I think the statement is pretty much non-informative and should be removed. SentientParadox (talk) 22:41, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2018[edit]

154.160.20.63 (talk) 19:34, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
No request made. Rmhermen (talk) 19:45, 26 September 2018 (UTC)