Talk:Chili powder/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Absolutely ridiculous

The article currently states "Chile powder is often confused with chile powder".

If the purpose of an article is to distinguish between two things which are pronounced differently but spelled the same, it should at the very least not mix the spelling of the two of them up. Also, both articles should link to each other, at the moment the Chili powder article doesn't. I'm changing all this now. Alboran (talk) 01:43, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Proposed merge

I propose we merge this article, Chile powder, into Chili powder. Please see discussion at Talk:Chili powder. Richard New Forest (talk) 21:48, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

No comments here, and no further comments at Talk:Chili powder, so merge done. Richard New Forest (talk) 20:07, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Further proposals

Please see further discussion at Talk:Chili powder#Compromise proposal. Richard New Forest (talk) 09:01, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

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.

Merge. I'll do the bulk move of the text and leave it to others to wordsmith the text that result. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:09, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Chile powder → Powdered chili — Relisted. Right now it looks like returning to a single article seems to be the consensus opinion. Raise any objections now. Vegaswikian (talk) 08:10, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

• As per extensive discussion at Talk:Chili powder blend. Widely used descriptive name, avoiding distinguishing similar articles by spelling alone. Richard New Forest (talk) 21:28, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

To elaborate a little... Two articles covering similar things up to now have had almost identical names: Chili powder and Chile powder (this article). The first covers a blend used in chili con carne and related cuisine; the second deals with powdered chilli, sometimes spelt "chile" in American English, although often also spelt "chili". There is no obvious dominant version for either thing, but "chili powder blend" (or some variant) is only used for the former, and "powdered chili" is only used for the latter. The proposal is therefore to call the article by a commonly used term which is unambiguous. I have already moved the former article to Chili powder blend; the parallel move of this article to powdered chili was blocked by a redirect. The current title is not clear, as spelling of this word is often inconsistent (even within the same source), and many users are bound to be confused – especially if they are used to the usual non-American spelling of the word in all circumstances as "chilli". Richard New Forest (talk) 23:11, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

• WP:COMMONNAME --Labattblueboy (talk) 06:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Not clear whether this is a support, oppose or comment. Could you explain please? Richard New Forest (talk) 23:11, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

• Support per nom and the long discussion at Talk:Chili powder blend. This article will then be appropriately disambiguated. What then of the chili powder/chile powder pages? This might be one of the few times there should be disambiguation page even though there are only two articles due to the potential for confusion of the two. — AjaxSmack 02:59, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. Chili powder, Chile powder and Chili powder blend should be merged into one article, presumably at Chili powder with the others redirecting to it. If there are sources that distinguish between the uses, then the one article can explain that (e.g., "Some use the term chili powder to refer to a blend of spices while chile powder and chile powder blend refers to a single spice"). There is no reason this can't all best be addressed in a single article. In fact, I'm sure it would be less confusing if it is all explained in one article. The separate articles are confusing. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:25, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

That solution has been proposed previously: it would be my own preferred one, and I and others have attempted it in the past. However, it has not stuck, and I've pursued the current proposal as an attempt to reach consensus. Richard New Forest (talk) 09:20, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Born2cycle. I spent some time trying to wrap my head around the differences and I also believe merging everything into one article is the best approach. The lede would require some proper wordsmithing but is likely the best approach.--Labattblueboy (talk) 18:09, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I also support a merge for the reasons provided here. I'm not convinced that chile powder/powdered chil(l)i is really much of a distinct conceptual entity rather than a descriptive, i.e. powdered chil(l)i. — AjaxSmack 00:48, 19 November 2010 (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.

"Chile" or "Chili"?

The article is titled as "Chile powder", but, for the most part, the phrase is spelled as "chili powder". In terms of statistics, the word "chili" is used 21 times in the article, while "chile" is used only 3 times (including in the title) and "chilli" is used once. A disclaimer to these statistics is that the references are counted toward these totals (otherwise, "chili" is used 17 times), but the template is not a factor in these statistics. I may want a few more opinions on this, but this does seem to be grounds for a move request. Backtable _{Speak to me}^{concerning my deeds.} 22:10, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The article is written in American English, so it is of course only sources in that variant which are relevant. As I understand it (as a Brit Eng user) Americans always spell the dish "chili", along with the spice mix used for it, but commonly spell the plant and fruit "chile" (although sometimes "chili" too). You are right that the article is inconsistent, and it does need correcting to follow the American usage: so "chili" throughout, except where referring to the spice mix and for the explanation of the British "chilli" spelling. If it turned out that the consistent "chili" spelling is in fact more common in American English, then I'd agree that the article should follow that. Richard New Forest (talk) 14:36, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: page to be moved, unanimous Kotniski (talk) 12:10, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

---

Chile powder → Chili powder – Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:ENGVAR. See the section immediately above. While it has been decided that this page should be in American English (suitable as a vague WP:TIES claim; chili peppers are from the Americas originally), the spelling "chile powder" is not the common spelling in either American or British English. (I don't think the spelling "chile" is used for the pepper in American english, either; that appears to be incorrect info from a previous editor who strangely insisted on splitting the page. oknazevad (talk) 16:58, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support - I've seen "chili peppers" and "chile peppers", but I've never eaten a bowl of "chile", nor ever seen "chile powder". That's just anecdotal, so I tried Google, and I get 15.1 million hits for "chili powder" and 373,000 for "chile powder". That's about 1.6 orders of magnitude. Also, Google books gives: 74.4K for "chili powder" 7.04K for "chile powder": just about one full order of magnitude. I think it's clear that "chili powder" is the common name, and that's even true in places where "chile" is a big part of the cuisine, i.e., New Mexico. -GTBacchus^(talk) 18:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

As a couple of followup notes: GT alludes to New Mexico. If anything, thats where the "chile" spelling is most likely, but that's only a small portion of the country, and it is apparently influenced by that being the Mexican Spanish name/spelling. Also, though hardly definitive, the link chili powder is the one at the disambiguation page chili; it is also used in actual article text (as opposed to the navbox link) far more often. oknazevad (talk) 18:30, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

• Support per WP:CRITERIA... The proposed title is more recognizable and natural than the current title. No significant distinction based on other factors. --Born2cycle (talk) 18:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support as per statistics supplied in favor of "chili". Backtable _{Speak to me}^{concerning my deeds.} 22:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support Should not have been moved at all Ng.j (talk) 23:50, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
• Support. Not an ENGVAR issue. In the UK we'd spell it "chili" or "chilli", but never (as far as I know) "chile". -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

  Well, that it would be at "chili powder", with one "l" not two, would be an ENGVAR thing, as the two "l" spelling is predominantly British. But the big thing is that the "chili" spelling is the standard spelling in American English, not a relatively local variant, makin it the correct common name in the chosen variety of English. oknazevad (talk) 02:37, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Undoubtedly the proposed name is the most common form. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:46, 1 August 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Chili powder history (originally moved from article space)

I think that they should add more detail about the history of chili powder. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.29.69.177 (talk) 01:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Chilli powder in Thai cuisine?

Thai cuisine hardly uses chilli powder but it extensively uses chilli flakes (a.k.a. crushed red pepper) in many dishes. Perhaps that with "Pad Thai" that is made outside of Thailand chilli powder is used? But not in Thailand where always chilli flakes are used. It is hardly worth mentioning Thailand in this article. Mentioning the United States where chilli powder apparently is used extensively for making "chili con carne" makes more sense. I have no luck finding authentic Thai recipes that mention chilli powder but perhaps Oknazevad knows many of them? The recipes that I have found that mention chilli powder invariably turn out to mean chilli flakes/crushed red peppers. - Takeaway (talk) 23:36, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Just a quick search of "Thai chili powder" in Google shows me some Thai suppliers that are fairly finely ground. Maybe not as fine as US?Mexican varieties, but smaller than the flakes shown in the image you were adding. I am not wedded to its inclusion, but it just struck me as an odd removal, and wanted some evidence to back up the assertion, which seemed like personal experience more than anything. oknazevad (talk) 23:55, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

What you often see when you see finely ground chilli powder called "Thai chilli powder" is a fine grind not for the domestic market, but a finely ground "Thai chilli" which apparently is popular with some people outside of Thailand. Thais will use dried chillies whole, or crushed, or ground together with other spices at the same time to make a curry paste. They will not use pre-ground chilli powder for making curry pastes as it loses its flavour and colour too fast. If you are interested in a good recipe for Thai style chilli flakes/crushed red pepper, have a look at Andy Ricker's recipe. He calls it powder but here's the image that is lacking in the recipe. It shows you very roughly ground dried chillies. Very often, Thais still use a large stone mortar and pestle to make this. The fine chilli powder of this article can only be made with a modern grinder which of course was never traditionally used in Thailand. It also produces a different flavour which doesn't suit the traditional recipes. - Takeaway (talk) 00:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps why the chilli flakes looked so big in the image that I had added is because it is a close-up of the tiny little saucer of about 4 cm in diameter. - Takeaway (talk) 00:13, 3 October 2014 (UTC)