Talk:French fries/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Malt Vinegar in the UK

Fish and Chip shops do not traditionally serve Malt Vinegar in the UK due to esoteric licencing conditions on brewed products. Instead they use a product called Non-Brewed Condiment which is a vinegar substitute created with water, flavourings and caramel colouring (from memory, not to be quoted).

Whilst the page does state that this is the case in Scotland, it sounds as though the page is saying this is a Scotland only thing whereas the prevalence of non-brewed condiment is much wider and will be found at most Fish and Chip shops throughout the UK.

Thus, the section where it describes the UK as having fish and chips served with Malt Vinegar should be changed to reflect this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.32.32.105 (talk) 11:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

"Chips" are the common term in Tokyo?

• "In areas like Tokyo where "chips" is the common term" - can anyone verify this? I lived in Japan and nobody calls them chips - the standard Japanese term for French fries is literally "fried potato" - フライドポテト. The Japanese Wikipedia article refers to it in the same way. Alexthe5th (talk) 04:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

"like Tokyo" was a recent vandal addition. Now removed. –Henning Makholm 14:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I can also confirm that "フライドポテト" is the standard JPN terminology. Never heard anything even resembling "chips" (especially since "ps" doesn't work orthographically in JPN). BadDoggie (talk) 15:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

French fries- rename to most commonly used name

Why isn't this just called 'french fries'- it should be, as it's the most commonly used name. I don't think in everyday life, most people call it "french fried potatoes". Even in the UK or other countries, they'd be known as 'french fries' or just fries (if people weren't using the word chips of course.) Even in the UK a lot of restaurants call them 'fries', due to the influence of McDonalds, and french fries is the name for more thinly cut chips. Merkinsmum 20:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC) Merkinsmum 20:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

"French fries" is only common in the US. In all other countries where English is the dominant language, "chips" is the most common terminology, an abbreviation of "chipped potatoes". See http://officialfrenchfries.com/docs/international.html. BadDoggie (talk) 15:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

In most countries I've travelled in, "fries" or "French fries" is the most common, and certainly the most easily understood (in non-English speaking countries too). And in the UK, people understand "French fries", but if you ask for "chips" elsewhere, you get something else entirely. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

People /understand/ "fries" thanks to McD's and KFC, but the local parlance in English-speaking countries tends toward "chips". 82.135.9.64 (talk) 03:40, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Can't this article be simply called "Fries". As has been remarked upon by so many others French Fries is a very Amerocentric term with specific connotations (i.e. not a chip). Or even better make Chips and French Fries seperate articles. The layout of this article is a bit like lumping Hamburger in as a footnote in the Sandwich article. 130.88.167.5 (talk) 22:43, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Would you like French fried potatoes with that?

• I think this article should be called simply "French fries" for the same reason the "ketchup" article is not called "tomato ketchup" but even more so. I have never heard of the term "french fried" being applied to carrots, yuca, etc. Anyone else? (Yes, I haved lived outside the USA). --House of Scandal (talk) 17:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you. Have a look through this talk page, and count the number of times they have been referred to anything other than French Fries. Quite a few directs involved in name change, but I'll get around to it unless some really good arguments against are posted. Kaiwhakahaere (talk) 03:13, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move. JPG-GR (talk) 03:57, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Moving to "French Fries"

Unless objections are made I (or Kaiwhakahaere) will soon move this article to french fries. House of Scandal (talk) 17:49, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I object. I agree that "French fries" is a common informal expression, but "French fried potatoes" is the full normal name which you'd expect to see in an encyclopedia. I'm pretty sure that in everyday speech, "TV" is much more common than "television", "whore" /"ho" is more common than "prostitute", "bike" is more common than "bicycle" or "motorcycle", and "phone" is more common than "telephone". But the encyclopedic names remain television, prostitute, bicycle/motorcycle, and telephone. Perhaps someday "French fried potatoes" will be obsoleted the way "autobus" has been obsoleted by "bus" or "iced cream" by "ice cream", but for now it's the appropriate term. --Macrakis (talk) 03:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for chiming in. In fairness, I should have said "if convincing objections are made". While I understand your point entirely, I disagree and this article title isn't what I'd expect "expect to see in an encyclopedia." It's almost a wierd, Mr. Burns-esque anachronism already, like asking a waitperson to bring you "tomato ketchup". In brief, I don't feel that "french fries" is an informal term. House of Scandal (talk) 03:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

• I support the move to French fries. Macrakis, your point about bike/bicycle is right, but the examples you gave above are of terms that are still used. On the other hand, no one would ever ask for French fried potatoes. I think it's much closer to the "autobus" example — perhaps not quite obsolete yet, but heading there. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 06:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say that people ordered "French fried potatoes", any more than they usually say "I will bicycle to my house" or "It was presented on a television program". But it seems to me like the standard written term, and I find "French fries" jarring as an article title. Perhaps someone could look in a few cookbooks, food encyclopedias, FDA publications, etc., to see what's used in reference sources.

And I do not appreciate your peremptorily labelling my objection as "unconvincing" and implying that you'll ignore it and go ahead with the move anyway. Your comparison to the Simpson's character makes it clear you're coming at this from a spoken-language, pop-culture perspective, but WP is a written reference source. (Thanks for the link, though, otherwise I'd have had no idea who Mr. Burns was; by the way, has the spelling "weird" also become Mr. Burns-esque, or is "wierd" a distinct technical term in the Simpsons universe, like "doh" vs. "duh"?) --Macrakis (talk) 12:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

• I was not disrespectful; in fact, I thanked you for your opinion. I have not moved the article as I am waiting for more opinions. I was not convinced by your statement, nor so far has any other editor been. For me to call it unconvincing was a subjective statement but it was not an impolite one. To focus on a minor spelling error in my message is, however, not in the spirit of friendly camaraderie which is an important hallmark of a good Wikipedian. Please focus on the subject, not on the editor. I don't think less of someone for being unaware of a character on a show that has been on the air for twenty years. I do not appreciate the implication that knowing and referencing such a relatively well-known fictional character is puerile or undermines my argument. It does not, and I am not coming from this from a pop culture perspective. I am thinking more about how a publication like the New York Times or a PBS documentary might reference this food item. Someone would say "I bought a bicycle". Someone would say "I watched television". Under no ordinary circumstances would a native speaker of English say "I ate french fried potatoes" or "we cooked french fried potatoes" (I prefer not to capitalize "french" as it's a cooking term that is not usually capitalized in recipe books). This issue is for neither you nor me to decide. It is open to debate. In the future, please try to be civil, especially when the issue at hand is as minor as where we list and article about french fries. - House of Scandal (talk) 14:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

First you implicitly categorize my objection as "unconvincing" (not "I'm not convinced" but apparently your definitive judgement), then you compare my ear for language to a caricatural pop-culture figure, and then you say I've been uncivil and consider it a personal attack that I point out that your reference point comes from pop culture? Then you call me a "dick" for querying the spelling "wierd" in a Simpson's context when in fact Google finds more hits for "simpsons wierd" than for "simpsons weird" (unlike the Web in general)? I repeat my question: 'is "wierd" a distinct technical term in the Simpsons universe, like "doh" vs. "duh"?'... or are people who talk about the Simpsons on the Web less good spellers for some reason? Since I don't follow the Simpsons, I have no idea.

All that being said, some evidence would be useful instead of your insulting comparison of fellow Wikipedians to your Mr. Burns. So I looked.

• The respected Oxford Companion to Food uses the term "chips/frites/French fries".
• Google Books (more reliable than the Web at large) finds twice as many FF as FFP, though interestingly FF seems more predominant in fiction, and FFP in reference books.
• Google search in .gov finds more FF than FFP
• Even Google Scholar finds many more FF than FFP

So I think I have to concede the point based on the evidence.

I still would appreciate an apology for your incivility. --Macrakis (talk) 04:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I support the move. I think french fried potatoes is something between archaic and old-fashioned rather than simply formal. I don't like to use "Ghits" a lot but I think in this case it is demonstrative. "Bike" shows only four times as many hits as "bicycle". Even though bike is more of a verb and will also include motorcycles. "TV" gets only six times as many hits as "television". "French fries" however gets 65 times as many hits as "french fried potatoes". It is closer to 64 if the "potatos" spelling is also included. "Frites" gets 41 times as many hits and even "steak frites" gets two and a half times as many results as FFP. Although those fall to twenty and two if only English pages are included. I don't mean to say that FFP is not a part of the language but it is not a common alternative like the other terms are. --JGGardiner (talk) 00:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Support per WP:COMMONNAME. Compulsions70 (talk) 17:55, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Support, perfectly acceptable. On an aside, may I express amazement at the enormous breadth of subjects on SlimVirgin's watchlist :) --Relata refero (disp.) 18:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

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

Dutch fries

And again--

I would have thought that fries would have come from Friesland, The Netherlands. These kind of food are allways recognized as an American food, when in actual fact, they all originate from Europe. E.G.

• Hamburgers - allways recognized as an American food, they actually come from Hamburg in Germany.
• Hotdogs (Frankfurters) - Another food recognized as american, they come from Frankfurt, Germany.
• Pizza - most people know this is an Italien food, but it is mosty mistaken as an American food.←≈≠≈→ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.246.56 (talk) 20:17, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Remove 'freedom fries' from the list of variants of terminology

No appreciable number of people use this term; far fewer use it seriously. It was a short-lived fad. It remains a part of the colelctive American conscious but this should be described elsewhere in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.70.48 (talk) 23:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The introductory paragraph should be changed to make the distinction between fries and chips.

I believe the introduction should:

1 State that North Americans use 'fries' as an umbrella term for cut strips of potatoes of any size cooked in this fashion.

2 Clarify that we Brits and most everyone else define 'fries' as long, thin strips of potatoes, cooked in this fashion, whilst 'chips' are specifically the thickly cut strips of potatoes, cooked in this fashion, more traditional to our countries.

3 Use only words that exist in the English language, unlike 'uncapitalized'.

I think it is unlikely that the powers that be would allow a separate article for chips, as many non-Americans who have commented seem to want, but I think the above would be a good start in making clear this important and so far neglected distinction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.70.48 (talk) 00:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed! I was shocked (as much as one could be on the issue of fries/chips) to see chips and fries with basically the same definition. The basic premise of this article is flawed.

In a nutshell:

chips = directly cut from potatoes (think traditional fish & chip shops)

fries = re-constituted from potato (as in typical fast-food)

Somewhere along the way this distinction has been blurred. Unfortunately I don't have citations/sources at hand but I'd strongly encourage members to follow-up on this... --Nycmstar (talk) 21:17, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

1. There was the distinction between fries and chips, but some zealous editor took it out a few days ago. I'll put it back.
2. The distinction is not "Fries are reconstituted." Fries can be reconstituted, but are much preferred to be cut from whole potatoes.
3. Which English language doesn't have the word "uncapitalized"? NJGW (talk) 13:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

We need a ref that the word fries is used in the UK to describe any kind of chips. Thanks, SqueakBox 14:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you find this controversial? cn tags are for items that are doubted. There are plenty of unsourced sentences in the article, so what makes this one so controversial to you? [1][2][3][4] NJGW (talk) 14:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, absolutely, we only ask for sources for items we believe are controversial and I find this adoption of the word fries for chips controversial, absolutely to the point of wanting a ref but nott o the point of removing the info right now. But also I'd like a source that the thin sliced chips found in restauarants and burger take-aways are called something different from fat sliced chips more found in traditional fish and chip shops, but also essentailly a source that in Britain the word fries is used at all in a mainstream way. Thanks, SqueakBox 15:05, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I just listed 4 sources. Check out the last one, a story about London's best chip shops in Time Out London, which constantly refers to the long thin variety as fries, and all others as chips. Are you still not convinced? NJGW (talk) 15:18, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I haver reworded slightly as this fries chips distinction isn't universal, and nor does the ref claim that it is universal in the UK. The Americanisation of British English is pretty inevitable. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

That does sound more accurate. NJGW (talk) 17:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Advertising article ?

To me, this article looks more like an advertising page for supermarkets and restaurants. Very questionable I'dd say. Lars 13:57, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Why? for what reason? provide examples please --82.152.177.245 (talk) 21:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleted section

I deleted the following text as it didn't seem to have anything important to add: ===Philippines=== On [[September 22]], [[2007]], [[Benguet]] [[State University]] (BSU) announced that 4 [[potato]] varieties -- Igorota, Solibao, Ganza and a 4th one yet to be given an official tag -- possess more than 18% [[dry matter]] [[content]] required by [[fast-food]] chains to make [[crispy]] and sturdy French fries.<ref>[http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/regions/view_article.php?article_id=90044 Inquirer.net, RP's new potato varieties good for French fries]</ref> NJGW (talk) 04:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Sweden - two things

"In Sweden, the fries are called Pommes Frites (Pronounced Påmmfritt) is often served with any kind of sauce, mostly with ketchup. Dipping the fries in ice cream sometimes occurs as well." 1) Can somebody confirm that chips are dipped in Ice Cream in Sweden? That is, often enough to actually be included on Wikipedia, as opposed to a stunt or just goofing off. Is this combination is sold anywhere? 2) Does the Swedish pronunciation, using Swedish spelling, help anyone on the English Wikipedia that doesn't already know how to pronounce it? Just looking at it, my almost non-existant grasp of Swedish suggests that it isn't too far off from the original French pronunciation (as opposed to the way Germans say it). Wouldn't IPA make more sense? I gotta know! --Stomme (talk) 13:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I haven't heard of any eating pommes fites with ice cream and I live in Sweden. I believe it is pronounced quite the same as "Pommes frites" would be pronounced in french (a language I don't speak). At least "Påmmfritt" is sounds verry french when its pronouced in Swedish. Steinberger (talk) 10:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. The comment on Sweden was added in March by an anonymous user with an IP in New Jersey who has done some editing on Stockholm). I don't doubt that chips have been dipped in ice cream (it sounds better than some of the other condiments I'm reading about here); but it needs to be something common to be included on Wikipedia. I'll add a fact template for now. Without that information, unfortunately Sweden doesn't have a local take on the fries situation. I've had them there, but I cant remember anything different from anywhere else. --Stomme (talk) 10:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

You should not doubt. I did a small household equiry, asking my sister. She knew of it, and she and some of her friends have eaten McFlurry with Frensh fries at McDonnads. However, the same source said that its was not common practice. Not that she knew of. She was not convinced that it is a Swedish specialty either. Steinberger (talk) 11:48, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Peru

Regarding the origin of "French fries", I live in Peru and conventional wisdom here is that they are Peruvian. They are common here, and not just in fast food. Also, we know that potatoes are Andean in origin, and very possibly Peruvian (the Wikipedia entry on Potatoes cites a study showing they are from the Lake Titicaca area). Current Peruvian cuisine makes extensive use of potatoes generally, and french fries in particular (especially as a very common, almost necessary, component of saltados, or stir-fries). I don't know the history and can't vouch for how long Peruvians have been french-frying potatoes; however, it is surprising to see all of the origins/history section focusing on Europe, when potatoes were brought there relatively recently, and have been here in South America a lot longer. Just looking at the history of the potato, and current Peruvian gastronomy, it certainly makes sense to think that "french fries" may have gotten their start here, and then been imported (or re-invented) in Europe. Jefs (talk) 01:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I haven't found any info on the Incas frying anything, just freeze drying potatoes: [5]. I do think that some Peruvian info should be put in here seeing how important fried potatoes are to the cuisine. Who knows, maybe the Europeans in Peru were the first ones to fry a potato... I just didn't find anything through google scholar though. NJGW (talk) 06:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Name of Dutch origin

The name 'fries' is a word of Dutch origin, most likely originating fom Friesland. Phoenix Bird of Fire Contact phoenix, click here- 10:39PM (GMT)

I doubt it. Why would fried potatoes be called "French Dutch"? NJGW (talk) 21:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Protection

Protect this article. 80.44.254.150 (talk) 13:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Definately not from France

I live in the United States, and the only case of someone ending up saying that French Fries were invented in France is when they don't know why they're called "French Fries," along with a lack of research. It's like saying Turkeys come from Turkey instead of North America. Many Americans eventually learn that French Fries = Frenched-Fried Potatoes. Enough so, I'd say that the claim about French Fries being from France is pretty much a misconception or even an urban myth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.195.61 (talk) 21:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The article does not further that ether. The true origin is said to be Dutch or Belgian and the misconception is attributed to the original usage of French phrases to refer to it in America. Steinberger (talk) 22:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Chips

Why doesn't the British chip have seperate article (as it is nothing like french fries) rather than the couple of lines it has now. I think its fair to say the british chips are world famous (even sold in certain places in the US) and as such warrant more notability than a trivial paragraph in this article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.103.88.63 (talk) 08:41, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Please provide sources so we can properly consider your suggestion. NJGW (talk) 15:41, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

How about the wikipedia Fish_and_chips article and all related sources? Seriously, I'm afraid that wikipedians will have to sort this eventually, you can't continue being so America-centric about everything. I've seen a slew of articles over time on Wiki that retain the U.S. name even if they are in the clear minority usage. Chips should at the very least have its own page. Note that Grits has its own article despite the fact that it is virtually identical to Polenta, but because Grits are a colloquial Southern U.S. food then it's justified to have its own article. Double standards much? There are certainly as many if not more differences between Chips and French fries, both in appearance, taste, texture, method of cooking etc. 89.107.7.71 (talk) 12:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Grits = Polenta??? That's a good one. You've either never had grits or never had polenta (or had neither). If there are sources for chips and fries being different, then we have something to work with. NJGW (talk) 17:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Variants

" ... about 10 mm; thinner variants are 'pommes allumettes' (matchstick potatoes), ±7 mm, and 'pommes pailles' (potato straws), 3-4 mm (roughly ⅜, ¼ and ⅛ inch respectively)."

Very bizarre and inconsistent measurements. "About X mm", "±X mm", and "X-Y mm". Three completely different ways of saying "about". One of them, incorrect and mathematically illiterate ("±X" is common but incorrect for "about X"). Then the conversions to inches ... first of all, not necessary. The section is about fries in France. But if used, normal ascii fractions are definitely preferable to the single-character fractions, which can render in strange and varied ways on different platforms.

" ... about 10 mm; ... about 7 mm, ... about 4 mm ..." would be the consistent and logical way to write it. The whole parenthetical inches section could just be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 (talk) 12:35, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

chips vs fries vs crisps

I think if a person types in chips, it should go to a disambiguation page asking if the person meant fries or crisps and potato chip article should be under crisps, in which you can explain all the subtle intricacies and differences. Likewise with fries. That way both sides lose the conflicting word. to clarify, put what is now potato chips under crisps and leave french fries as is, the have anybody who types in chips be asked to clarify.72.221.122.42 (talk) 19:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Section headings and subsection headings

Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Section_headings, point 3:

"Section names should preferably be unique within a page; this applies even for the names of subsections."

-- Wavelength (talk) 22:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Culturally Belgian

I think all this talk about who invented the fries is getting kind of silly, the reality is that nobody knows for sure. What we DO know however is that fries are much more rooted in Belgian culture and cuisine than in that of any other country. Every town has multiple "frietkot" places and nearly all belgian families have deep fryers at home. Much like how when we think of spaghetti, everybody thinks of Italy even though it possibly didn't originate there, it's part of Italian cuisine. Even in countries that possably created the first fries (France, Netherlands, Spain) fries are seen as something typically Belgian. I think this should be reflected in the article more than dubious claims of who was first. --Lamadude (talk) 14:25, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Questions about appropriate use of ad-like text

In the accompaniments section, there are some variations of french fries associated with specific restaurants and chains. For example, under United States we find "Chili's has Texas Cheese fries on the menu, fries topped with melted cheddar, bacon, jalapeños, and is served with a side of ranch dressing." To me this seems more like advertising than informative content. Additionally, the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=French_fries&oldid=262152232#Preparation preparation] section has no text, and the image is to a Crisco advertisement. (Step one: "Fill ordinary saucepan two-thirds full of snowy, creamy Crisco"). I'm not really sure what the procedure is here. Should they be changed? Removed? Rewritten? JazzMan 20:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it sounds more like advertising than informative content..

Warrington (talk) 21:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)