Talk:Deglazing (cooking)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Maillard reaction

Shouldn't that be the Maillard reaction, rather than caramelization? Burschik (talk) 10:57, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Burschik - is there a simple way of explaining the difference in layperson's terms? I had a look on wiki to educate myself on the difference and I feel none the wiser, suggesting there may be further work to do there. I'd certainly appreciate a technical qualification of this sort on a page like this, as long as it is clear and allows for the fact that 'caramelisation' is a meaningful cooking term in the absence of such qualification.

Also: is it odd that this page begins with "Deglazing is a term used in more than one context." rather than there being two articles and a disambiguation page?

Mjmcm (talk) 02:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll split it apart now. DMacks (talk) 04:19, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fond

On what basis can we say that referring to the browned bits on a pan as fond is "incorrect"? It's my impression that this "incorrect" usage is fairly common, so the phrasing in the article comes off as a bit prescriptivist. Radioactivated (talk) 00:57, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Foam (culinary) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:05, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additions made to the "Deglazing" page

The page will have an added history and etymology section, a list of dishes that use deglazing, and a section for technical and cultural caution when it comes to deglazing. What makes these section important is that they'll allow readers to look for recipes related to this technique with an idea already in mind for what to make after. The history section also adds a section where significant examples of the technique can be found from the past. With these sections, readers will have an option to look for recipes they may feel more experienced to learn. The technical and cultural section also will make a reader check recipes over so they don't make a mistake and learn how other cultures may create food differently with different techniques than what's already familiar. (Squigglygeode22 (talk) 00:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Unfortunately, I had to remove all of your edits, as they failed WP:V policy. Every factual claim must have a cite that supports it directly. No synthesis of ideas or using your own logic to jump from one to another. And none of the cites you did provide support the claims you made. This is a common beginner-editor mistake. There is no alternative but to read the actual references themselves and then write the content yourself strictly using their ideas. Do not ever rely on ChatGPT or other systems either. DMacks (talk) 01:50, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's perfectly okay, thank you so much for the information about the edit removal. I'm a university student who's doing this edit for a project, so it's great to learn more about how the site works with editing. If there's any other advice that would be best practice for the edits made, I'll be glad to work them into future edits to avoid the same mistake (Squigglygeode22 (talk) 01:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Did your professor give you any training materials or other information about writing Wikipedia content? There is are a lot of pre-written tutorials for students and advice for instructors about how to make these sorts of projects successful, especially if your school is in the United States. If not, let me know and I will dig some up. If you let us know what school it is, I can see if one of the Education liaisons could get in touch with them to offer some resources. In either case, the Wikipedia Education Program is the key starting-point. DMacks (talk) 04:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]