Wikipedia:Peer review/Butter/archive1

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


I hope to get this to FA soon. I haven't converted refs to footnotes yet, and obviously the "Health and nutrition" section needs some more meat. Any input or help at all is much appreciated! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:44, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Nice, well-rounded article. 1) However it has a slight US/Western tilt. Butter in the United States must consist of at least 80% butterfat by weight; in France, 82%... ; in the United States, this is usually to ... etc. 2) (though the buttermilk most common today is instead a directly fermented skim milk) -- remove the parentheses. 3) Great Britain --> United Kingdom 4.) (McGee 35) etc should be converted to {{tl:inote}} =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:19, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. I've been struggling with the American/Eurocentrism, and you're right of course. It's especially inane because India seems to be the butter (or ghee anyway) capital of the world. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:54, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
I would rephrase it more on the lines of "In most countries, butter must consist of between 80-82% of butterfat by weight...". Something on those lines would be more neutral. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:57, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Your easy issues (United Kingdom, parens, footnotes) are done now. I've been slowly trying to give it a less US/Europe focus as well. Thanks again. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:15, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Buffalo-milkers must have difficult jobs. My wish list for this article: (a) a more detailed description of chemical properties of butter - it is a fatty acid (a long hydrocarbon chain with a carboxyl (acid) group), the molecules easily slide past one another making butter slippery, has a hydrophilic carboxyl group on one end and a hydrophobic methyl group on the other which makes the molecules lump together to protect the hydrophobic end, differentiate cis and trans formations, also S and C formations, why is the melting point so low (lack of double bond allows an otherwise large, pack densely together forming a solid but a little bit of heat easily forms double bonds and undueing the packaged structure and forming a liquid, etc. (b)less nationality orientation, is it possible to switch to types of butters, like instead of in the United States, this is usually to a temperature of 85 °C (185 °F) to maybe for commercial butter x, this is usually to a temperature of 85 °C (185 °F) (c) pictures in the "Types of butter" section (d) history beyond 1910, such as the origin and fate of the mass production of butter. By the way, ever hear about Quebec's odd butter-margarine laws? I'll make a run through it and add what I can. --maclean25 19:54, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
(a) Such a thorough discussion of the chemical properties might be more appropriate in butterfat; butter, with its 15% water, 5% protiens-and-other, and three states of butterfat, has a lot of variability beyond what such a chemistry treatment might suggest. (b) My primary source for that info - McGee - is quite US-centric; I'll see what I can do. (d) Good idea. Thanks. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:15, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
For a non-western source here is a link to an FAO report on milk and butter stuff. Also, that 80% milk fat requirement was agreed to in the Uruguay Round at the WTO. --maclean25 07:59, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Nice! Especially the WTO thing. I'll definitely work that in there. Haven't had the time to look at the FAO ones yet. Update after a quick look at one: Interesting, developing nations traditionally make butter mostly from soured milk, not cream, it seems. And they can have some really high water contents (up to 30%). —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:29, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Something which may or may not be relevant are flavoured butters like garlic, herb, lemon and brandy butter, they are mentioned in passing- but there is probably room for some more detail. And utensils for using butter, like the butter knife and varous butter curling devices [1]. I agree that a breakdown of the types of fatty acid in butter would be a good addition- especially with regard to nutrition--nixie 02:38, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, nixie. I'll definitely have to get some more chemistry in there, with two concurring opinions. Just curious, have you actually ever come across a butter curler or similar? I'm a kitchen catalog freak, and I don't remember noticing one. Maybe it's a cultural thing? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:36, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
My Dutch gradmother used to have one - but I don't recall seeing them in kitcheware stores any time recently in Australia. I think they're probably a utensil of a bygone era- when people used to have tea and so on.--nixie 03:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
So far (okay, it's been maybe 10 minutes) my quest to find a good source for information on butter knives has proved fruitless. I did like the uncyclopedia page, though... —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:12, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
I basically got a mention of brandy butter in there, or more generically, hard sauce. I think I'm going to move on to FAC. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:48, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
A good article, well researched and well presented; a credit to all the contributors. I did agree with the suggestion that the description of the biochemistry of butter was a bit weak. However a quick search did not come up with a any good description of fat molecules on Wikipedia being either too simplistic, ie fat or too technical ie lipids. I will think about having a go but it would be better if you could find someone who is not 30 years out of date. I would also suggest moving the chemistry away from the initial paragraphs, making it a later subsection. But despite all that it is a good article. ping 05:56, 2 December 2005 (UTC)