Talk:Yoghurt

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.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Turkish Word

It was mentioned in BBC's Rick Stein's Food Heroes that yoghurt is a Turkish word which means what it is - yoghurt. Rick Stein also said that Americans irritatingly pronounces it "yo-ghurt" which I thought was funny and very true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.194.151.126 (talk) 18:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Javascript solution

In order to attempt to facilitate a compromise everyone can live with, I'm working on a script for monobook.js to allow people to see the article in their preferred spelling. In order for this to work, i have had to add markup to sections that discuss the spelling issues. Please do not remove these tags for at least the next few days. --Random832 19:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough - although the last solution which did almost the exact same thing was deleted ({{sp}})--danielfolsom 19:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
My solution is intended to have the minimal invasiveness to article content - a span class around sections that discuss spelling differences [to tell the script to leave them alone] and the rest of the logic is entirely in the script. It's at the bottom of my monobook if anyone wants to test it out [it uses an error handling script, just remove the try/catch lines to remove the dependency on that. it also depends on the function $() as an alias for getelementbyid] --Random832 20:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
I still find it absurd to use a lesser spelling for the main and use such methods to accomodate the more common one as an alternate, but I think this isn't a bad idea. --65.206.50.107 23:11, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
Solution - suggests that there is a problem. I'm staggered that some people can't seem to grasp that us Non-USAsians have learnt to accept that there are going to be articles written with an unfamiliar spelling and that learning about alternative spellings in such a way is just part of life's rich tapestry and not a problem. Jooler 00:14, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
I am a american, and frankly I have seen simmilar reactions from non-americans on pages like color (though not to this extent) - but I think any reactions to these spellings should be reverted and shunned, thus I agree with you --danielfolsom 02:10, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

"Suggests there is a problem" - of course there is a problem, regardless of whether you think the problem is the spelling or ignorant people complaining about the spelling. --Random832 03:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

And "any reactions should be shunned" is an overly simplistic way of thinking of it - this case is special for two reasons - because the spelling without 'h' is more common _even in the UK_, and because the article was standardized on the other spelling first. Those, and not "americans are more boorish" as you seem to think, have been the source of the increased controversy here. --Random832 23:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

"because the spelling without 'h' is more common _even in the UK" - I suppose you're using Google hits support this assertion. Google hits are determined by page links to pages containing the word not the number of pages with the word itself. Thus a page in the UK that links to a US page with the word 'yogurt' will show up under 'yogurt' and not 'yoghurt', and if the page itself contains 'yoghurt' it will show up under both. A better way is to use Google searches http://www.google.com/trends?q=yoghurt%2C+yogurt&ctab=0&geo=GB&date=all&sort=0 Jooler 07:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Ahh -that's right- because wikipedia policy definitely dictates what spelling should be used based on popularity! --danielfolsom 11:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I was merely countering the assertion that "the spelling without 'h' is more common _even in the UK". Jooler 23:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh ok - the comment was more so directed at dscarth though--danielfolsom 03:08, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
If the "established" spelling was johgort or some other minor variant instead of "with an h", would you still be arguing that point? Popularity is the issue here. --Dscarth 16:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
No - it's not, Wikipedia guidelines are the issue here. And I'm from the u.s. and I use the yogurt spelling - so don't try to act like it's a British conspiracy or something - if jogurt was the established spelling and it was part of the English language then I'd support that too.--danielfolsom 03:07, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Some people have Javascript disabled due to some sites abusing javascript like disabling keyboard and mouse buttons, popups, browser hijacking, etc. Dave Rebecca 19:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] spelling

yoghurt is definetely the more traditional spelling so this spelling should go first as well as be the article name —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.59.47.75 (talk • contribs)

Take a stroll through the archives. Already been covered and recovered. --Bobblehead (rants) 19:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Should not we have the license to close down threads bringing up this point again... ALTON .ıl 05:20, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't think we should. Consensus has not been reached on the issue, and even it it had, based on WP:CONS, 'consensus can change'. I'm not sure what 'closing down threads' means exactly since deleting talk page text is usually frowned upon, unless you are suggesting treating such comments as vandalism and blocking those editors. Antonrojo 15:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
There is still no consensus. I had argued the last time and we had not managed to gain a sufficent majority of opinions to warrant a change of name, nor had we come to an agreement. For some reason the yogurt discussion seems as polarizing as an abortion discussion, there's little middle ground, and frustrating to both sides. --Dscarth 19:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

As Dscarth says people will recognise no possible compromise or centre ground and it becomes a matter of honour to protect their neighbourhood favourite spelling irrespective of the colour or flavour or if the yoghurt is savoury, sweet or sour despite the furore caused.

As Dscarth says people will recognize no possible compromise or center ground and it becomes a matter of honor to protect their neighborhood favorite spelling irrespective of the color or flavor or if the yogurt is savory, sweet or sour despite the furore caused.

The whole thing becomes a matter of theatre and humour to many. It has caused me to snigger to analyse the maths that has been used in the past as people labour and manoeuvre with each instalment in defence of a point of view, I am just grateful it is not packaged in grey aluminium.

The whole thing becomes a matter of theater and humor to many. It has caused me to snicker to analyze the math that has been used in the past as people labor and maneuver with each installment in defense of a point of view, I am just grateful it is not packaged in gray aluminum.

One little titbit in closing; the Oxford English Dictionary gives the following spellings in citations:

One little tidbit in closing; the Oxford English Dictionary gives the following spellings in citations: 1625 Yoghurd - 1687 Yogourt - 1837 yahourt - 1883 yaghourt - 1912 yaghourt - 1925 Yoghurt - 1970 yogurt - 1980 yoghourt

If forced to express an opinion, for this article it is Yoghurt because that is the established spelling.--Drappel 22:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Let me fix that for you: center, neighborhood, color, flavor, yogurt, theater, humor, laugh, math, manouver, installment, defense, aluminum. I may have missed something obvious, but this variant of the spelling has been contested for quite awhile. Established is merely POV. Dick. --Dscarth 23:37, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
And, as for the Oxford English Dictionary, regardless of what they cite as historickal spellinges, they lead with "yogurt". --Random832 23:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Fellas - we just had this discussion, so can we not flatter an obvious troll?--danielfolsom 04:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi people, this is an unrelated point- I know that in India, people say yogurt with the short 'o'..could we edit to include this information? Also in India, yogurt has been eaten for generations and it partly orginates from this area as well; it is known as dahi in much of the subcontinent and is referred to colloquially as khata, "sour" in many a Punjabi village. Can we please include the former? Thanks! :)

Could we add a note about the Canadian spelling? Many packagers use the term 'Yogourt' because it can serve both the french and english spellings. Many US made products carry two different spellings, but those that are made in Canada almost always contain just 'Yogourt'.

Not that it matters at this point, but I have never, ever seen it spelled any way other than "yogurt" until I have read this article. Zarggg 02:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't have any cultural or sentimental attachment to any particular spelling for the product which one dictionary defines as "A custardlike food with a tart flavor, prepared from milk curdled by bacteria, especially Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus, and often sweetened or flavored with fruit," as I mainly started eating it about a week ago. Growing up, I don't recall any of my family or friends eating it, and I haven't paid much attention to it until aforesaid time.
But a short while ago today I noticed that there are a number of spelling variations of the product. So I decided to investigate further to figure out the preferred spelling and because I enjoy learning about words. Whereupon I noticed Wikipedia's spelling for the entry, which I found to be curious given my investigations. What follows are the results of my investigations.
OneLook Dictionary Search lists 26 dictionaries altogether, and 19 dictionaries in the "General" dictionary category, for the spelling of yogurt.
Whereas OneLook Dictionary Search only lists 18 dictionaries altogether, and 14 dictionaries in the "General" dictionary category, for the spelling of yoghurt.
Each of the following dictionaries by major dictionary publishers have the entry for this product under the spelling of yogurt, with yoghurt being given as an alternative spelling: Compact Oxford English Dictionary; Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary; Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition; and The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition (Houghton Mifflin Company, 2000).
Google Search currently lists 16,700,000 results for the spelling yogurt.
Whereas Google Search currently only lists 5,650,000 results for the spelling yoghurt, which is only 33.83% of the total results for the former search.
I have three different brands of this product currently within my residence. Those brands are as follows: Dannon, Publix, and Coburn Farms (a Save-A-Lot brand). They all spell the product as yogurt, but not yoghurt.
Based upon my investigations, I conclude that the preferred spelling for this product, to an overwhelming degree, is yogurt, and not yoghurt.--209.208.77.247 (talk) 00:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I've got a brand of Yoplait with me right now that says "Yogurt". Klosterdev (talk) 23:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your independent research. I have checked it out, and it appears to be conclusive. I don't feel that a consensus is an appropriate course of action anyway. Unless you are an etymologist, yogurt producer, yogurt reseacher, or have similar qualifications, you have no business voting on the spelling of the term. It also appears that voters were not evenly distributed (geographically), and are likely a group of friends. Anyone could call a simple consensus on the spelling of any term and have all their friends vote for something unusual. It is neither objective nor appropriate. This is compounded by the fact that the evidence for the spelling "yoghurt" is nothing more than people calling the evidence for "yogurt" into question by citing ethnocentrism. And yes, I have read all of the discussions on it. Quite hypocritical if you ask me. [User:Laplacian54|Laplacian54]] (talk) 01:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect: Fermented milk

Does anyone know why Fermented milk was redirected to Yoghurt? Fermented milk can be any number of products in the English speaking world such as yoghurt, cultured buttermilk, sour cream, crème fraîche and a host of other fermented milk products that are made internationally and have no English name, e.g., kefir and filmjölk. It would make more sense to have a Fermented milk products page that lists all of the various types of fermented milk products (such as yogurt, etc) that link to more specific pages that address each type of fermented milk product. Anyone against removing the redirect, and perhaps creating a page called Fermented milk product (and then redirecting Fermented milk page to Fermented milk products? A good reference page from Canada to start the new page: Fermented Milk Products apanda 21:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

It was redirected because someone thought it was a good idea. If you think your idea is better than be bold. SchmuckyTheCat

[edit] See Also

WP:STEAM (in other words, every time this comes up, you crush opposition and keep more than one person from gathering, and sacrificing everything at the altar of "pre-existing consensus" - "license to close such discussion" wtf. --Random832 04:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Colombo

It should be noted that it was not Dannon, but Colombo which first introduced yoghurt in the US.

Yogurt didn’t debut in the U.S. until 1929, when Armenian immigrants Rose and Sarkis Colombosian and their sons hand-filled the family recipe into 8-oz. glass jars and distributed them via horse-drawn wagon throughout the Northeast. http://www.foodprocessing.com/articles/2004/177.html

Not sure when the distribution itself began, but NY Times: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9807E7DA133BF93BA35751C0A967948260 states that Rose Krikorian Colombosian, who with her husband founded the first yogurt manufacturing plant in the nation, in her obituary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.209.59 (talk) 20:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yoghurt?

I fail to understand why this article is titled "Yoghurt" instead of "Yogurt". Every photo on the WP Commons of a package of this product says "Yogurt" -- which makes "Yoghurt" a confusing title for the article. Never in my life have I seen the spelling "Yoghurt". I went down to Food Lion, Wal-Mart, Lowes, and BP, and I could not find one single yogurt product labeled "Yoghurt". So from what I've been able to learn, "yogurt" seems to be the modern spelling, which would seem to make it the most appropriate choice for the article. Pierce Phillips (talk) 23:03, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

This has been discussed ad nauseam. WP is international; "yoghurt" is a perfectly good spelling, even if it is not the most popular in the U.S. --Macrakis (talk) 02:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
But as the folks on Conservapedia point out, Wikipedia was founded by Americans, is hosted in America, and the majority of its userbase is American. Besides the fact that dropping the silent H is progressive -- it's part of how languages evolve to meet the needs in the most simple way possible -- and aren't you folks all about change and progressiveness and evolution? Pierce Phillips (talk) 12:46, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
So if you want yogurt you look at Conservapedia; if you want yoghurt you look here. Everybody gets what they want -- no tyranny of the majority. Isn't freedom of choice wonderful ? -- Derek Ross | Talk 03:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hmm...you didn't make yourself at all clear, so I'm going to go ahead and assume that your point was somewhat silly. Back on track: if "yogurt" is such a widely-used, modern spelling -- to the point that it appears in every picture here on Wiki showing a package of yoghurt -- then why isn't it the title of the article? Why are we hanging on to an archaic silent 'h'? Pierce Phillips (talk) 15:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Please go back and read the Talk archives. All this has been argued before. --Macrakis (talk) 18:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Pierce, different variants of English as accepted, per Wikipedia policy. The assertion that Wikipedia is an "American" project is a misconception - it's always been an international project. In fact, the target audience for Wikipedia is people who can't afford to pay for encyclopaedia access - in other words, the target audience is decidedly non-American. All English - regardless of region - is dominated by archaic spelling...things like "ie", "c" and the final silent "e". Kwibling ova a singl letu yogut is sile. Guettarda (talk) 18:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

in other words, the target audience is decidedly non-American

This also is incorrect. English Wikipedia is a reference for all English-speaking individuals. Whether they want to pay for an encyclopedia is not the main issue (maybe it is for some, but there are more important reasons for creating Wikipedia).
« D Trebbien (talk) 17:22 2007 December 28 (UTC)
Image usage issues give me headaches and I usually do my best to not involve myself in them but couldn't a suitable "yoghurt" package image be added to commons simply by someone snapping a picture of such a package and uploading it? Is formal permission required from the product manufacturer? Surely a simple e-mail response from the manufacturer would be sufficient to grant such permission?Zebulin (talk) 21:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Rather bizarre digression, but to answer your question, taking photos of brand name products is creating a derivative work, which is still subject to full copyright law. It's less of a hassle to have these unlabeled products. ALTON .ıl 03:08, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
It is rarely going to be a derivative work, but in any case it is fair use to take a photograph of a packaged product including artwork, brand name, and trade dress and publish it without the copyright and trademark holder's permission. --Macrakis (talk) 04:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Actually, the usage of yoghurt for the entry title has nothing to do with internationalism. As I point out in my above post under 209.208.77.247 at 00:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC), yogurt is the preferred spelling for even the British dictionaries, and yogurt is a far more common term for this product on the internet (based upon Google searches).--206.148.136.37 (talk) 03:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] pH

whats the ph (range) of yughurt? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chendy (talk • contribs) 20:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merge proposal

Don't know if this has been raised before but I think it maybe better to merge Frozen yoghurt to the the Yoghurt page although the Frozen yoghurt has enough references/notability to stand on its own I believe it may flow better if it it was incorporated into this article. I don't think the article is too long to merge either. --Sin Harvest (talk) 12:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't merge I think the yoghurt article is long enough, and if we merge in all the other yoghurt-related articles (frozen yoghurt, strained yoghurt, lassi, etc.) it will be much too long. --Macrakis (talk) 14:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough --Sin Harvest (talk) 10:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better to list Frozen yoghurt in the Varieties section rather than the See also? A more informative heading and a better list of varieties, it seems to me. Should I? — the Sidhekin (talk) 18:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Frozen yoghurt isn't a "variety" of yoghurt -- it is a dish prepared with yoghurt, just like tzatziki, lassi, Azerbaijani yoghurt soup (yogurtlu aash), etc. They should be listed together somewhere, perhaps near the top of the article. --Macrakis (talk) 19:04, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
I see what you mean, but with Tarator, Ayran, Lassi, and Yop on the list, I read "variety" to include such.
But again, I can also see those in a seperate list, also including Frozen yoghurt.
And then, why is Kefir on the list of varieties? The fermentation of Kefir is not by bacteria only, so it is not even a yoghurt, is it? And if by some definition it is, is also Blaand and/or Cheese?
Hmmm ...— the Sidhekin (talk) 19:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm planning on removing the merge tag unless someone believes there is some merit on merging? Although I personally thought the flow maybe improved with a merge I also don't think it is such a big deal and am not going to make a huge fuse over such a minor merge. --Sin Harvest (talk) 02:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Correcting one word

The following sentence has been changed:

"The use of yoghurt by ancient Turks is recorded in the books..."

to

"The use of yoghurt by medieval Turks is recorded in the books..."

because ancient implies an era from 30th century BC and finished 5th century AD (with the fall of the western roman empire) while in the sentence it talks for the period of 11th century AD and that's 5-6 centuries after the end of anything ancient! A.Cython (talk) 14:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Culture

The section on culture states that yogurt is not pasteurized. While it is true that the yogurt is not re-pasteurized after culture fermentation, the source milk is pasteurized beforehand. See http://www.aboutyogurt.com/lacYogurt/facts.asp#q3 24.243.128.189 (talk) 18:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Patalingus

I do not believe that this section is a necessary part of the article. I think that it does not contribute to the knowledge of yogurt and is simply inappropriate. Furthermore, the picture is even more inappropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.151.142.211 (talk) 02:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Addition of fruit jam

"Yoghurt with added fruit jam was invented to protect yoghurt from decay."

Does the addition o fruit jam protect the yoghurt from decay or deos the sugar protect the fruit from decay. 78.151.174.92 (talk) 10:42, 7 June 2008 (UTC)