Talk:Coney Island hot dog/Archive 1

Archive 1

Vandalism

I added a citation which credited Charles Feltman of Coney Island with originating the hot dog at [1] to foil vandals. Steelbeard1 19:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

What is the difference: Coney Dog VS Chili Dog?

Is there a difference between the two, or are the names interchangable?

The image below shows the two different 'styles.'

Which one is the real "Coney Dog?"

http://img414.imageshack.us/img414/5565/dogs6nz.jpg

Image "A" for sure.−HiRanger 16:12, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Image B looks like the "real Flint Coney Island" served everywhere in the Flint, MI area (where Koegel's originated). Image A looks like the version served in Detroit, which Flint residents call a chili dog. Flint residents are adamant that only the Flint version is a "real" Coney Island. 68.188.169.162 05:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Coneys at Sonic Drive-In

Is it at all worth input into the article that Sonic, a drive-in burger joint, serves six inch and foot-long hot dogs known as "Coneys"? ~ Joseph Collins [U|T|C] 08:37, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Too specific to Detroit's version

I'm from Syracuse, NY and anywhere remotely near here refers to a plain, pork hot dog as a Coney. I don't eat chili dogs, but I'm very sure that if you asked for a chili dog, you'd get a normal hot dog with chili on it. I do know that you can't ask for a Coney in the Southern US and have them understand what you mean, so its obviously a regional thing. My opinion then is that since it originated in Coney Island (New York State), the article should define a Coney as a pork hot dog; Detroit's version should be listed as a variation and not the de-facto "Coney Island Hot Dog". Static3d 13:28, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The white hots and coneys are two seperate things in western new york. I personally know this to be true for Buffalo, Niagara Falls, and Rochester. White hots are called coneys only in Syracuse, New York. This is because Hoffman Sausage, located in Syracuse, used to label their white hots as coneys. They no longer do this, they are now labeled snappers, probably to avoid confusion in other markets. That white hots are called coneys in one city hardly seems notable enough for inclusion. Additionally the reference 1 provided does nothing to support this. It mentions red and white hots exist, but nothing else. The description of white hots being spicier is in direct contrast to the reference being used. Jojuko (talk) 07:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

In Houston, Texas there is a local restaurant chain that sells Detroit-style Coney Island hot dogs named James' Coney Island. The chain was started in the 1920's by Greek immigrants to Houston named Tom and James Papadakis. The photo of the Detroit Coney Island hot dog looks exactly like one sold by James Coney Island in Houston. The company website is http://www.jamesconeyisland.com

I was born, raised and still live in Jackson, Michigan- HOME OF THE CONEY DOG - I grew up on the things. They have never changed or been added to in my lifetime. The main Problem is people most often confuse "Chili Dogs" and "Coney Dogs". The 'B' photo above is a decent picture of a "Coney Dog". The 'A' picture is definatly some kind of "Chili Dog". Coney Island Hot Dogs or "Coney Dogs" in these parts are: Primarily- Beef Wieners (and I say Wieners so they are not confused with Ball Park Franks or hot dogs that "Plump" when you cook em') They stay about the same skinny size even after cooking. Cooking = Grilled on a flat, iron, or stainless steel griddle over gas flame heat(like the griddles in a dinner that they fry eggs on). The buns are white, plain and soft. The Dogs are topped with "Coney Sauce", which is a dry, spicy, beef mixture- very simular to taco meat. While most people think of a "sauce" as being a liquid or having a solid/liquid consistancy, "Coney Sauce" is almost a DRY product. A small amount of natural juice is created in the sauce from low simmering it after cooking, but, never like a tomato or soupy sauce you would get from chili.- Next is raw diced yellow or white onions on top of the sauce (although here in my town you can ask for fried/cooked onions).And finally all is topped with Yellow Mustard. You can add a sprinkle of Red Pepper Fakes yourself or just chomp them down without. A bottle of Cold Beer, Coke or a Vernor's Ginger Ale is the popular drinks of choice to wash them down with here.

As I tell people all the time, there is a big difference between Chili and Coney Dogs to the people who know, just as there is a big difference to those who know the difference between Dressing and Stuffing at Thanksgiving.

A local reporter/celebrity, Brad Flory, recently tried to eat 1 Coney Dog an Hour for 24 hours. Sadly he failed in his attempt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.147.187.98 (talk) 04:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

"Coney Island" hot dogs

Coney Island hot dogs are not the kind served in Coney Island, NY. Note that the external links are all for Michigan companies, except Koegel's, which started in Michigan but is now in Florida. -- Cecropia 08:58, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

My name is Bill Keros, and I am the grandson of the founder of Lafayette Coney Island (Bill Keros I). Here's the story with the reason for "Coney Island" in the name:

My grandfather came over from Greece on the good ship Themistocles, arriving Ellis Island on October 23, 1910. He came on the invite of his older brother, Gus, who had a hat cleaning and shoe shine store at 124 W. Lafayette. Pappou arrived on shore, aged 20, and proceeded to head toward the one place that everyone was talking about...a must see...some place called "Coney Island" in Brooklyn. Having been born and raised in the small village of Dara, 12 miles east of Kiparissia,in the Peloponnesus of Greece, and straight off the boat, the very first thing he saw was "Coney Island." You can imagine the effect that sight had on his world view....an indelible imagine that still has us talking. He arrived in Detroit and worked for his brother for a while, and then suggested that they open up a hot dog restaurant next door at 118 W. Lafayette. I won't go into the reasons why Pappou wanted to open up a restaurant, and why a hot dog place in particular, but his brother decided not to join him. Looking around, he decided to name his restaurant after the the first thing he saw in the USA that left an indelible impression...Coney Island. Sensing that name was not enough, he looked around and saw that he was located on Lafayette Blvd., and put together the name "Lafayette Coney Island!" The year was 1914, an LCI was born! Three years later, his brother realized that the Coney business was much better than shining shoes and cleaning hats, and the American Coney Island was born.

There's much more to it then that, but in brief...that's the story...:-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkeros (talk • contribs) 07:36, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Koegel's is a Michigan company, still headquarted in Flint Township, and is NOT in Florida and is not available in Florida stores. Read more at [2] Steelbeard1 14:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

It should pointed out that there might be HUNDREDS of little lunch counters all over the eastern half of the country called "Coney Island", that were all started around 1923/1924 by Greek immigrants who never came NEAR Detroit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lsherwood59 (talk • contribs) 02:28, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Representative Image Replacement

Not quite sure why the representative image for Coney Island hot dog was changed Feb. 10 2013 from a Flint style coney to a Detroit style coney. While the former image was from Rio's, which is no longer in business, and the new image is apparently of a current Lafeyette coney, the change appears to be more one of personal preference by the editor making the change than a necessary change to add to or correct the entry. It doesn't seem a rollback to a previous version of the page is an appropriate edit at this time. However, future modifications of the representative image should have a reason given in the Edit Summary. Lunapiertech (talk) 01:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Suggested Merger with 'Michigan Hot Dog'

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I believe the suggested merge should likely happen. However, it would seem appropriate that the content of Michigan hot dog should be merged within the content of Coney Island hot dog, not the other way round. This is due to Michigan Hot Dog stating the style is likely derived from the Jackson Coney Dog, and therefore should be considered a coney derivative. Lunapiertech (talk) 11:16, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose. These are distinctly different variants with disparate origins, and to consider them one and the same is preposterous. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:30, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
• Opposing the suggested merger does not also include the right to cancel the suggestion. It is still up for discussion.Lunapiertech (talk) 11:02, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose as there are too many variations even within Michigan. Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:24, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
• ""Oppose."" I am the co-author of the book "Coney Detroit" and know whereof I speak. There are a coupe problems with merging. One is that there are several kinds of hot dogs in Michigan. (Around Saginaw/Bay City they use a "red sauce" on their chili dogs. This comes from tomato products, which are not used in the Coney Dog. Another issue ... west MIchigan serves chili dogs and all kinds of dogs with pickles. Another ... there is something called a "Michigan dog" in upstate New York and Vermont and parts of Ontario that, for all intents and purposes, is a version of the coney dog that migrated back East. You cannot buy a "Michigan dog" in Michigan. I also have to challenge the assertion that the coney was invented in Jackson, Mich. That is local lore, doubted by the people we interviewed at the Jackson coneys. We found no substantiating evidence of the start date claimed on the page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe.grimm (talk • contribs) 02:41, 19 March 2014‎
• Joe Grimm, thank you for joining the discussion. Lunapiertech (talk) 11:04, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
• Comment--The discussion has been up for over a month and consensus is against the merger. Why does Lunapiertech refrain from voting at all and going 3RR on us regarding the validity of the merger proposal? Steelbeard1 (talk) 15:18, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
• Comment--SteelBeard1, by removing the merger notice both yourself and TenPoundHammer are removing the possibility of others such as Mr. Grimm seeing that there's a discussion about the article. And again, there's no time limit for these discussions. Also, I did vote, i.e. "I believe the suggested merge should likely happen." Discussion needs to be allowed, not controlled as you have attempted. Your attempts to squelch discussion is specifically what I take issue with. Lunapiertech (talk) 00:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

But Joe Grimm agreed with TenPoundHammer and myself opposing the merger proposal and you did not actually vote at all. Proposing and voting are two different things. You proposed but you did not vote. Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:49, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Both yourself and TenPoundHammer removed the notice when you voted. Voting to oppose does not include the right to remove the notice at the same time as your vote. What you assume was not my vote was my vote, that I have to do it in a particular way just for you, is nonsense. Also, as a published author on the subject of the Coney, Joe Grimm's opinion is likely more important than yours and mine put together. My own info on the subject is at www.flintconeys.com. It would actually be nice to know what your knowledge of the subject comes from other than a need to control the discussion, particularly since you have shown zero interest in this article until now. Lunapiertech (talk) 09:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

The issue was lack of interest with only two votes, both opposed, after over a month the proposal was up. Also, if you look back at the article's editing history, I have contributed to the article with the most recent edit made in January of 2012. I 'm also an author who wrote about Flint MI's Coney Island restaurants in a chapter of my book Remembering Flint, Michigan. See [3]. Steelbeard1 (talk) 12:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

• Concede. Just realized exactly who SteelBeard1 is. Bud, that knowledge could have saved us some trouble! I only ask that you approach these situations with more tact and better up-front info in the future. Lunapiertech (talk) 22:27, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I noticed that the article's editing history showed that Lunapiertech started editing months after I made my last edit to this article. Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:36, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Coney Islands Outside Southeast Michigan

One of the major issues with this article is the apparent inability of Michiganders to accept that regional Coney Island outside southeast Michigan (i.e. Detroit, Flint and Jackson) are valid Coney styles. Even though I'm from the Flint area and prefer that style (meaning I'm also guilty of what I'm describing here), I'm realizing this article cannot solely represent Michigan, disallowing the other styles, even though we Michiganders do not see them as "Coneys" ourselves. IMHO, we Michiganders should not be claiming sole ownership of the term "Coney Island" as our own. That's simply untrue. Our bias in this is a real problem. The reality, however, calls for a reworking of this article to include Cincinnati Coneys, the White Hot in the Rochester NY area which is also called a "Coney", along with many others, with the three Michigan styles being listed in an unbiased manner among the variations. Anything else, i.e. the way the article currently stands, seriously dilutes the accuracy of the article. Lunapiertech (talk) 12:33, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

With adequate sources, by all means, be bold and rework the article. DP76764 (Talk) 05:58, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Dp76764 thanks for that. I've been digging into this for a while now and have found that, with the exception of the earlier German-owned coney joints in the Rochester and Syracuse areas of New York, Coney Islands are a Greek-owned phenomenon in states including Indiana, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Texas, all of which (so far) seem to use Coney Dog ingredients from German meatpackers. As a whole, the phenomenon appears to date back to Greeks and Macedonians who fled the Balkan Wars in the early 20th century. There's definitely a pattern in what I'm seeing.Lunapiertech (talk) 15:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I would agree. If you can find sourcing rather than original research, by all means let's include other styles of coneys in their own subsections. The Michigan dog seems to have been developed by a woman from S Michigan who moved and brought the recipe with her, so it's likely a related dish. The coney topped with Cincinnati chili was developed by Macedonian immigrants.valereee (talk) 12:43, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Reliable sources: Coney Island hot dogs are "ubiquitous" and the Michigan versions are a variation on them.

I believe we need to rewrite the lead to include all of the Coney Island hot dogs, and then have a section for each of the unique varieties.

If we want this page to stand as it is, it needs to be moved to Coney Island hot dog (Michigan) or similar. Let me say that I believe this is a unique variety. I believe it deserves its own article. But it is not the only Coney Island hot dog out there, and my sources say they are all related, even if they have unique and important differences. valereee (talk) 19:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

• Comment My apologies, I was only notified of this last post. I'm in full agreement with this, but have yet to decide how best to proceed. The difficulty is in how the name "Coney Island" refers back to the resort, which appears to be different with the founder of each type of Coney Island hot dog. There's a "pyramid" of sorts all pointing back to that one location. However the logistics are, to put it bluntly, very odd. In looking into it, here's my train of thought ... Legend states that immigrants would leave Ellis Island and, passing through the Coney Island resort area, would then eat at Feltman's or Nathan's Famous. They supposedly then established their own restaurant at their destination, adding Greek items to what they remembered from the menus at Coney Island itself, also adding their own version of what they called a "Coney Island hot dog". It must be noted that this did indeed occur in 1920 with Thomas and Kalliopi Nickolson, who founded Red Hots Coney Island in Highland Park, Michigan, a couple years later ... There is, however, a major logistical issue with that theory as a single explanation for how the name came about. Ellis Island is physically in New Jersey, and is located west of Coney Island. Immigrants headed into New England were ferried into Manhattan from Ellis Island, but immigrants with destinations to the west were ferried on barges into either Jersey City or Hoboken, New Jersey, to board trains. Quite simply, most immigrants never visited Coney Island as the Nickolsons did ... There's another issue with the naming of the "coney island hot dog". Feltman's Red Hot was technically a frankfurter. His location, along with Nathan's Famous, would have been known to serve frankfurters, not a "hot dog", due to the Coney Island Chamber of Commerce action banning the use of the latter term in 1913. Finally, Koegel's Coney product in Flint is a derivative of the German Vienna (not the canned Vienna Sausages), and is technically different from the frankfurter. So ... How do we manage that discussion in such a way that all the naming possibilities make some kind of sense, without giving each coney island "type" it's own article? Lunapiertech (talk) 23:32, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Lunapiertech, no problem! I could have pinged people.  :) Interesting, re: the logistical problem. The explanation may be in the fact that literally almost every instance of this 'Coney Island' name for a chili dog with a meat sauce is a creation of Macedonian or Greek immigrants. I suspect a lot of these folks spent some time in the area before heading wherever, and spoke with each other either on the way here about an experience they had heard about from relatives or friends who had already passed thru NYC or on the ground in NYC having naturally enough sought out some of their countrymen here in the states. The guys who 'invented' the "Coney" here in Cincinnati told their kids they'd been to Coney Island, according to the book 'the authentic history of cincinnati chili'. The book 'coney detroit' mentions the same a similar phenomena. The frankfurter/hot dog thing is likely a linguistic holdover -- when something changes its name because of a legal requirement, often the former name lives on a long time in informal communications.  :) And even if they heard them called frankfurters there, why would they call them frankfurters when they got to Detroit and everyone there looked at them funny? Now, to find THAT explanation in reliable sourcing, I don't know -- as a general idea, sure, but for this specifically? Probably not. But that would be why it doesn't bother me. valereee (talk) 13:18, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, sorry -- and re: the different kind of sausage used -- in 1922, I would suspect you used what you had. You should see what my husband's mother did to her Sicilian mother-in-law's spaghetti sauce recipe. She used what was available in Dayton OH in 1949. This "authentic Sicilian recipe," as given to me to recreate, calls specifically for oleo and Hunt's sauce. valereee (talk) 13:27, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Valereee One aspect of all of our discussion here is this: What's honestly a reliable source? I don't consider 'coney detroit' a reliable source in many areas as it uses family folklore, some of it differing depending on who you talk to at which restaurant. The same goes for 'Two to Go', the book on the history of the Flint coney published by the Genesee County Historical Society. In those nine pages of text alone, there are visible differences in family stories. The Flint coney is the one I've done the most historical work with, as I grew up on the thing. Macedonian-born Brayan had a 'coney' (which would have likely been a White Hot, which they call a 'coney') in Rochester, NY, nowhere near Coney Island (he'd immigrated a second time from Toronto through Buffalo in 1921). He disliked the coney in Rochester, and decided to do it his way. Once in Flint he got with Koegel, who modified his own Vienna product to lower the fat content so it would last longer on a restaurant grill, and called the product a Coney. Koegel still makes both versions today, one for the home, the other for the Flint coney restaurants. This in itself disputes using only what was available at the time, as it seems meatpackers were willing to take chances with new products. Now, I'm not at all trying to be argumentative! It appears, however, that there are as many individual stories to tell as there are Coney Island joints, and that each one is different. Generalizations of any kind can be easily disputed, and in many cases don't appear to work at all. I've been wracking my brain on this for a while now, and I hope there's something that clicks that makes some kind of sense. Lunapiertech (talk) 22:45, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, here's an opinion, which is definitely open for discussion: Facts are what's important. Regardless of the posturing of some, the personal likes, dislikes, and opinions of many (something a lot of Michiganders are definitely guilty of), etc., coney islands and chili dogs are merely hot dog variations. That in itself is a very simple fact. Now, how the variations were named appears cultural, with Greeks, Macedonians and, more recently, Albanians going the Coney Island route for some reason. Beef heart certainly does not define a coney island, rather it's the culture behind the originator. A coney island dog may indeed be a chili dog or vice-versa, as is the case of both the little-known Port Huron version, the Ft. Wayne and Cincinnati versions, and many others. But for whatever reason, their founders decided they were "coney islands". "Chili dog" appears to be an Americanized version, although some chili dogs pre-date local coney islands in some areas. That many people get offended when a coney island is refered to "incorrectly" as a chili dog is, quite simply, preposterous, and is more based on emotion than facts. So, there it is. Lunapiertech (talk) 01:08, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Well, you and I may not think that book is very reliable, but it's a university press, so that's practically the definition of a reliable source; we have to at least mention their versions on contentious points, I think. Ditto the other sources which are also books published by commercial publishers or university presses. We may think some apparently-reliable sources are actually better sources than others, but we can't use our own opinions to just leave them out. We can, however, come to some consensus on which of the reliable sources we draw from most heavily. valereee (talk) 09:47, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

I completely agree, we can't use opinion. But maybe I'm not giving you enough info on where that's coming from on my end ... One of the things I'm doing is to physically rewrite the history of the Flint coney as "fact-based", leaving my opinion out of it as much as possible. The Flint Coney Resource Site shows part of what I'm working on, but there's also a lengthy document I've been writing that points to the Balkan Wars of 1908 and 1913 as why people were leaving that area in droves during that time, which is apparently critical to the entire Coney Island hot dog phenomenon. I'm also the one who located the immigration document showing Simion Brayan was in Toronto working as a fur dryer for five years before heading to Flint and developing that style coney. "University press" might mean something to readers, but if information from such a publication is disputed by official sources or books having official references, that's where we should be looking instead. For example, the bulk of my information on the Balkan Wars comes from a couple sources. Those are "Report of the International Commission to Inquire into the Causes and Conduct of the Balkan Wars" published in 1914 by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and immigration information from "Michigan in Four Centuries" written by Dr. F. Clever Bald and published by the Munson Michigan History Fund in 1954. Dr. Bald was a Professor of History at University of Michigan, and there are lengthy references in both the Commission's report and Dr. Bald's book. Moving closer to home, "Two to Go" from the Genesee County Historical Society states Flint's population grew because of the number of immigrants apparently randomly moving into the area. (That's the implication the way it's written.) But in another area of its text it also states Koegel was told to move to Flint from Wisconsin because the automakers were growing, and that's where everyone was heading. "Progressive Flint", published by the Flint Chamber of Commerce in 1929 includes numbers and other information supporting the latter fact. So yes, the bottom line is that you and I are definitely on the same page. We need to use official sources or more-reliable sources with solid references in order to do this correctly, outside of opinion, and outside of the emotion of "Well, we can't say a coney is a chili dog or vice-versa because ... well, that's just wrong and can't be allowed." And really, documenting subjects in a fact-based manner is the whole point of this site. Lunapiertech (talk) 10:44, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

continuing discussion

Starting a new subsection, just for ease of editing. We do have to be careful about doing any WP:ORIGINAL research. Immigration documents are primary sources; using them to prove that the information in an (ostensibly) reliable source is original research, so we can't use that. Now, if you through your work end up getting your document published in the Free Press or by a university press, that would be information we could use. But we can't use it until it's published in an ostensibly reliable source, especially if any reliable source refutes the information. The Carnegie report probably is reliable. The Bald book may be reliable; depends on what the Munson Michigan History Fund is, but the fact he was a professor of history at the UofM helps. The Genesee Co Historical Society might be reliable for noncontroversial assertions. Ditto the Flint Chamber of Commerce.valereee (talk) 13:19, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Valereee I understand, my point was only that I've been dealing in facts on this, and agree completely that we need to get this page away from opinions and emotion. :-) The only part of that which would likely be included is the information on the Balkan Wars, as the reason for why Greeks and Macedonians were headed this way at the time. For example "... People were leaving the area in droves as the Balkan Wars continued. Greek emigration to the United States subsequently increased in rather significant numbers. The Carnegie report lists Greek emigration to the United States on page 391, beginning with 172 emigrants in the year 1885 (the number of steamers being 78) and climbing with alarming steadiness to 36,580 in 1907 before leveling off, the chart on page 391 finishing with a number of 37,021 in 1911 (the number of steamers being 347)." That's not exactly how it should read here, but that's some of the data from that report. The area was decimated, and people were looking for a new home. Lunapiertech (talk) 10:54, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Lunapiertech, I'd agree that a section with a brief mention on emigration from Macedonia would be appropriate as providing context on why it's not coincidental that so many of these dishes were developed by Greek/Macedonian immigrants. valereee (talk) 11:12, 25 July 2015 (UTC) EDIT TO ADD: okay, I've made a start -- see what you think. valereee (talk) 11:33, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

re: why 'coney island'

Lunapiertech as a note on the anecdotal stories -- not that we can use it, but it's interesting -- see the first talk page section with the story by bkeros valereee (talk) 11:36, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Valereee The opening paragraph of the article applies to Michigan, but even then not the Port Huron style, and needs to be changed. I'm thinking of a different way to open, maybe ... "The term 'coney island' as it applies to restaurants is largely a Greek phenomenon brought about by the influx of Greeks and Macedonians to the United States in the early 20th century. The 'coney island hot dog' is a hot dog with a savory sauce that's offered as part of a menu of dishes of Greek origin, along with classic American 'diner' dishes." Or something along those lines. Lunapiertech (talk) 07:10, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Lunapiertech, yes, the lead definitely will need updating. I had figured to leave it until after the rest of the article was fleshed out, since it's supposed to summarize what's in the article, but there's no particular reason not to update it as we go along! That sounds like a good start! valereee (talk) 10:51, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Pinpointing the First Coney

For decades there has been debate about which restaurant served the first coney. However, even in that length of time no reference has appeared. Stating one was first before another may be more of an emotion-based statement, not fact. For example, a change was made today stating Jackson, Michigan, was the first location, in 1914. However, Ft. Wayne Famous Coney Island also opened in 1914. More accurate dates are so far unknown. Until a specific date and location can be determined for any such statements, the statement should not be included in the article. Lunapiertech (talk) 21:52, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Sourcing issues: self sourcing & unsupported information removed

At 13:10, 9 December 2016 I left a note on the talk page for user Spshu regarding under "Old Grand Blanc location an IHOP?" under Halo Burger correcting a reference that was my own error. In just over an hour, user Spshu had gone to my own profile page, discovered I regularly edit the "Coney Island Hot Dog" page, and undid my last two edits, his first action being at 14:17, 9 December 2016. The timeline is specific here as to this being a vidictive act on the part of Spshu. User Spshu had not edited on the "Coney Island Hot Dog" page prior to this act.

Spshu, I caution you against further vindictive edits, and any edit war on your part which might follow. Lunapiertech (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2016 (UTC) + Lunapiertech (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Spshu, this is your second warning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lunapiertech (talk • contribs) 16:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Spshu has not discussed even though it has been requested. Third and final warning.Lunapiertech (talk) 16:44, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Luapiertech, can not seem to see that the IHOP mention was removed by me from the other article and there is nothing to argue about at the Halo Burger article. There is nothing to be "vindictive" about. I edited per WP rules, I caution you against such further claims of vindictive editing. This claim is clearly a failure of you to Assume good faith. I have previously edit this page, please actual check the edit history before you start making false claims. Both my edits were done for proper reasons that were given in the edit summaries plus quoted in the added source. WP:SELFSOURCE for Swig restaurant does not merit it being mention in the article. Since, it was self published and not published in a reliable source per WP:UNDUE, Swig should not even be mentioned. My second edit was to remove information claiming longest continuously operated Coney Island (not in source), added sourcing that Flint, Jackson & Kalamazoo style version are not separate version but the same and removing unsupported (even in the self source) information about "Kalamazoo style" version and Coney Island Kalamazoo. I don't know how edit according to the rules is vindictive? Spshu (talk) 16:58, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Spshu the timeline of events are specific, and do not show good faith on your part, nor does the edit war that followed. I cannot assume what is not there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lunapiertech (talk • contribs) 17:03, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

I just showed above that that is false, thus showing that you are not showing good faith. You were making attacks in edit summaries and the talk section title. The administrator actually indicates that you (and Steelbeard1 in jumping on your bandwagon with out looking) have made a major misjudgement as you were the one that "question other editors' motives". --Spshu (talk) 21:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia will never achieve overall integrity or even a decent level of respect as long as vindictive, bullying individuals such as yourself are allowed to run rampant under the guise of "assume good faith". That's the same as the middle school Principal ensuring people the sixth-grade bully is "really a nice kid who's misunderstood". I know of Steelbeard1's integrity. You, however, have not shown any integrity, dignity, or even simple good faith yourself in this situation from the very beginning. You lambasted me over on the Halo Burger Talk page for "using my own words against me", promptly looked at my profile, found out which page I edited most, and then came over here and vindictively began the bullying here as well. You're part of the problem with Wikipedia not having real integrity, as are the Admins for not taking you to task for it because of the politics of "assume good faith". That statement only allows for the number of real problems you've cause on Wikipedia, as can be seen on your own Talk page and anywhere else you've bullied others and been vindictive. You should have been banned some time ago. I'm appalled at your lack of integrity and zero sense of responsibility. Integrity is important. Your attitude is important. You need to figure out what that means and act accordingly, for the sake of Wikipedia's mission and overall integrity. That you did this, that you haven't been properly reprimanded, and that others like you are not properly reprimanded as well, is why I have no further use of you or Wikipedia itself. Do yourself and Wikipedia a major favor and get a clue, and behave here accordingly. Lunapiertech (talk) 11:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Attacking me again for false reason doesn't make it so. All you are trying to do is repeat your charges - already proven false - as following the sourcing rules is not bullying. If Admins were following following what I am doing by standing up to the likes of you who lash out attempting to own articles or dominate articles by using the 3RR. I have discussed content which is acting accordingly, while all you have done is decided that I am "bully" showing exactly what you claim I have done. So, reread your above rant with your actions in mind. Seeing how an article that I have previously edited is doing isn't vindictiveness. Note that the administrator Floquenbeam has reprimanded you directly: "Don't bring disputes from other articles to this one. Don't question other editors' motives." As I pointed out before, the issue was already resolved at Halo Burger by using neutral language, so it hard for me to be vindictive here. --Spshu (talk) 18:02, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't know how to make this any clearer. @Spshu and Lunapiertech:, focus purely on the content. You are both doing exactly what I said not to do. If you question someone's motivation or integrity or intelligence or anything, I will block you for a week. Discuss this on the merits, and solely on the merits. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:19, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Now is it agreed upon that the former Halo Burger in downtown Grand Blanc was a former Perkins Pancake House? Steelbeard1 (talk) 17:06, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Article protected

Work it out here first. Don't bring disputes from other articles to this one. Don't question other editors' motives. When protection expires, any of the 3 of you making an edit that is similar to one of the disupted edits that does not have consensus will be blocked. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:46, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Floquenbeam Thank you.Lunapiertech (talk) 17:52, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Agreed. Steelbeard1 (talk) 18:34, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Coney Island hot dog. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120905150841/http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20100213/METRO/2130302/Chicago-s-new-import--Coney-islands to http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20100213/METRO/2130302/Chicago-s-new-import--Coney-islands

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:55, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Tony Packo's Hungarian Dog?

Is this really a coney? Tony Packo's doesn't say anything about the Hungarian Dog being a type of coney. Is there anyone calling this a type of coney? --valereee (talk) 18:45, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

broken markup

Hi, RTmolo! I see you've made some changes, but it's left some strange broken markup; it seems to be caused by sourcing to Wikipedia, which we don't do. We source only directly to reliable sources, not to other wikipedia articles. Let's discuss. --valereee (talk) 01:06, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Can we come to some agreement on the general TYPE of food?

I am open to the idea that a Coney Island hot dog has much more specific ingredients than a generic chili dog, which can include any number of different seasonings, consistencies, hot dogs, toppings, and/or buns. I'm willing to concede it having its own article rather than being merged into chili dog. Can we discuss whether the term 'chili dog' is the correct generic food type (as opposed to calling it a type of sandwich, for example, which would seem to be the next most likely generic category) and that the Coney Island as prepared in areas of southern Michigan is a very specific type that is notable enough to have its own article, and still falls into the overall generic category of chili dog? valereee (talk) 16:46, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Okay, so: crickets. I propose a new lead:

A Coney Island hot dog is, very generally speaking, several unique variations of a chili dog. Generally a Coney Island is a some type of hot dog in a bun, topped with a meat sauce and sometimes other condiments. Each unique regional variation was developed apparently independently by Greek and Macedonian immigrants in the early decades of the 20th century, sometimes with unique variations within a single region.

valereee (talk) 09:57, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

This warrants a larger discussion about hot dogs and sandwiches and maybe food categorization in general i.e. the cube rule. https://cuberule.com/ I think that a coney is a chili dog. But that depends on your definition of what chili is. It seems that Flint and Jackson people might say that their topping is too dry to be considered chili.

Jewsephus, well, I personally think a coney is a type of chili dog and a chili dog is a type of sandwich. But people are very funny about how you categorize their food. :) --valereee (talk) 00:52, 25 November 2019 (UTC)