Talk:Proofing (baking technique)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Food Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Proofing vs. Prooving

I've never heard the term "proving" used for this process. A Google search on the terms "proofing bread" and "proving bread" gives a 20:1 preference to "proofing." All of the baking books I have on the process refer to it as "proofing." I will try to update the article further in the near future.--Nleamy 14:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Funny, I've never heard of "proofing", and have always called it "proving". I've just done a google search for "leave the dough to prove", and got 419 resuts, whereas "leave the dough to proof" yielded only three. ElinorD (talk) 12:34, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Also, I question the 20:1 result. I admit that a search I've just done it over half a year later than the one you mention, and it was done through google.co.uk (which my computer automatically goes to, even if I enter google.com as the address), though it searched all sites, not just sites in the UK. My results are as follows:
ElinorD (talk) 13:00, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I am now finding the same search results as you did on the US Google search (though I do remember ten months ago getting a much larger spread...) but I continued to find flip-flopping results on other variants ("dough to proof" vs. "dough to prove," "proof the dough" vs. "prove the dough," etc.). Nonetheless, looking through the results for each, this seems to be a split between British English and American English - not a matter of which term is right. Looking at the Manual of Style it indicates that the manner to deal with regional differences in English dialect is to go with the form used by the first major contributor. Is there a manner which could better indicate the variance in terms which could resolve this problem?
--Nleamy 15:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I don't really mind, as long as the term really exists. I actually doubted it when I first saw the article, because I've never known it to be called anything but "proving". I've added "also called proving" to the article, but frankly I'm not worried about the actual title of the article. ElinorD (talk) 16:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge?

unleavened breads I have rewritten a bunch of the article, but I'm not sure it stands on its own. It should probably be merged into Yeast (baking). As a compromise, I've added a little bit about the Proofing Oven. I attached a Subway restaurant picture, and an external link to a specific proofer. I'd LIKE to use the picture from the external link, but until I can get permission or go take my own picture, the Subway one might have to suffice. --Mdwyer 22:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I feel like the page could be made to stand on its own. I think the article would likely be a bit out of place on the yeast page, I think a new page on baking technique or bread baking terms would be useful. Perhaps a new project to start? --Nleamy 04:45, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Originally, I would have disagreed with you, but your changes to the article have been GREAT! I had also though about merging with Dough proofer, but then I'm not sure if the Retarder article, then. They are both pretty much stubs. I've gone ahead and added all the banners and edited the equipment block. Have a look at it and tell me what you think. --Mdwyer 23:13, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
I think that would probably make sense. All three of those are stubs, and will be for all of time unless we get someone who knows a lot of history or other background about proofing equipment. Seeing as I am betting these pages don't get all too much traffic, I guess wait a day or two for any external objections and then I'll switch them around.--Nleamy 01:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
I know I'm coming late to the discussion, but I think that the suggestion to create a new page on bread baking techniques is a good one. Is there still some interest in this? --Gandalf StormCrow 22:58, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm still interested in it... I just too lazy to do it myself. Rewriting Quick Bread has been on my Things To Do list for at least a year. If you did the WP:BOLD thing, you'd have my appreciation, at the very least. --Mdwyer 03:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Looking through the article on baking as well as the other more process oriented pages linked in the category [[Category:Cooking techniques], I wonder what the best organization for this information would be. As it stands, I feel like the proofing page we have here is relatively strong, combining some technical information with process details and tools. I feel like the best way to access this information would be by linking it better with the bread page and by vastly expanding the baking page. But there's always room for more...--Nleamy 07:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I've looked over the articles on bread and baking, and it seems to me major rewrites would be required to fit the fullness of information on baking techniques into those articles. However, I think that it would be easy to create a new article and creat links in both bread and baking. Let me give some thought to this, and I'll be ready to come back here and offer a proposal in a bit. Does that sound reasonable? --Gandalf StormCrow 16:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
So, I began a draft page on what will hopefully eventually be something on baking bread. I took some of the material from baking, some from proofing, lamé, quick bread, etc. If folks would like to edit this, talk about it on the talk page there, etc...--Nleamy 03:27, 6 January 2007 (UTC)


Nathan has already put in some good work toward a rewrite. However, my thoughts go in slightly different directions, so I am working on a revision of his work here. We can talk through the differences once the two drafts are closer to completion. --Gandalf StormCrow 14:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)