Jump to content

Talk:French fries/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

article rename

Shouldn't this article be called chips? as french fries are a sub type within the wider category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.41.184 (talk) 01:51, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

That distinction is specific to the UK afaik. See the first comment on this talk page above. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:01, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
The distinction applies in Australia as well, which probably means it also applies in New Zealand. As it stands, the article title is completely US-centric. Maybe that can be justified but we do need to face up to these linguistic differences and their impact. Part of the problem is that the common term in the UK and Australia, Chips, goes to a pretty ugly disambiguation page, not this one, leaving the UK and Australian usage somewhat disenfranchised. An Aussie typing "chips" is going to hit a page with 48 different meanings. That's ridiculous! HiLo48 (talk) 05:12, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
In Canada, they're called French Fries too. And the disambiguation page is due to the fact that there are lots of things called chips. Oreo Priest talk 16:48, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes, that's an explanation, but not an excuse. It doesn't solve the problem, which is that the name that is the common name to many is buried on a page with 48 different meanings. It's not good enough. HiLo48 (talk)
Isn't this position a little inconsistent with your attitude towards the naming of football / soccer? After all, French fries is the single globally understood common term for the item that you call chips. ;-) Jmorrison230582 (talk) 15:31, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
And what, pray, is my position on the global naming of soccer/football? That posts reinforces my view on the poor logical thinking, knowledge and discussion skills of those involved in the discussion on the naming of Soccer in Australia. Your position has just been weakened further. And you have half derailed THIS discussion. Sad. HiLo48 (talk) 19:38, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
In your opinion. It also seems to be your opinion that every other editor except you is incompetent. Maybe we should all just leave you to edit the site by yourself, then everything would be perfect. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 08:56, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Do you have any thoughts on the topic, rather than me? HiLo48 (talk) 00:10, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
HiLo48, note that an American typing 'chips' looking for potato chips is going to end up on that same page. And 'chips' meaning 'French fries' is hardly buried when it's the first thing at the top of the page! Oreo Priest talk 18:45, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Congratulations on completely missing or ignoring my main point. HiLo48 (talk) 19:38, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Leaving the sarcasm aside, what, then, was your main point? Oreo Priest talk 19:59, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Systemic bias. HiLo48 (talk) 21:21, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

But this is akin having the an article about all types of beer called lager on is a a subset of a larger set, as such it makes sense to name the article for the overarching set. french fries are a specific sub type of chip, for example you can specify as the option for a burger meal, chips, fries or wedges. Maybe the easiest solution is to give chips its own separate article? and focus this one solely on the thin cut fries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.41.184 (talk) 16:19, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

The chip company cited in the article clearly differentiates between chips and fries http://www.mccain.co.uk/mccain-products/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.41.184 (talk) 16:32, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

The notion that chips is the 'common term' in Australia for french fries is just another bullshit HiLo48 WP:IDONTLIKEIT attempt at convincing us that because he thinks a certain way or uses a certain word, the rest of Australia does. Absolute rubbish. I'm Australian, and I use the term fries or french fries all the time. I use the term chips at times too, often combined with the words 'Hot' / 'Fish' - ie. Hot chips / Fish'N'Chips. But to say that chips is the _most common_ term used by Australians when referring to french fries, is rubbish. Can you provide supporting evidence of this claim other than the fact you're (or at least you think you are) a good faith editor, and you speak on behalf of all Australians? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.13.128.104 (talk) 02:22, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
My apologies. I was mistaken in my choice of words. I should have said "'Chips' is A common name among all Australians." HiLo48 (talk) 05:14, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

"French fries" reference predates supposed use by American soldiers in Belgium

To add under Culinary Origins:Belgium after "Some people believe that the term "French" was introduced when British and American soldiers arrived in Belgium during World War I and consequently tasted Belgian fries.[16] They supposedly called them "French", as it was the local language and official language of the Belgian Army at that time, believing themselves to be in France.[13]"

However, an 1899 item in Good Housekeeping says: "The perfection of French fries is due chiefly to the fact that plenty of fat is used" Good Housekeeping, Volumes 28-29 159 Vol XXIX No 1 July 1899 Whole No 249 http://books.google.com/books?id=G_ImAQAAIAAJ&dq=%22french%20fries%22&pg=RA1-PA159#v=onepage&q&f=false

Also under "France and other French-speaking countries" 'One enduring origin story holds that French Fries were invented by street vendors on the Pont Neuf bridge in Paris in 1789, just before the outbreak of the French revolution.[18]" ADD However, a reference exists in France from 1775 to "a few pieces of fried potato" and to "fried potatoes".

Causes célebres curieuses et interessantes, de toutes les cours ..., Volume 5, p41 and P. 159 ("fried potatoes"). edited by Nicolas-Toussaint Le Moyne Des Essarts http://books.google.com/books?id=DhMEi6nMuRAC&dq=pomme%20frites&pg=RA1-PA81#v=onepage&q&f=false

69.228.39.189 (talk) 02:35, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: No clear request. Start a new section (not an edit request) if you want to discuss adding more sources about the origins of the term. Also, I'd note that Good Housekeeping might not be the best source. EvergreenFir (talk) 17:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
For what it's worth, the Good Housekeeping source was proof that the term predates WWI. Oreo Priest talk 17:08, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Soggy fries

Is it known why some fries are crisp while others are like mashed potatoes inside? Does this have to do with how they are prepared, or are they allowed to sit too long after frying? Do some businesses serve soggy fries because they are too cheap or because they don't know how to make them crispy? If someone has a source on this it might be good material for the article. 72.208.148.85 (talk) 04:16, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Maybe some businesses serve soggy fries because they or their customers prefer them that way. HiLo48 (talk) 04:23, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
I think the factors at play would be variety of potato, and temperature of the cooking oil. I believe that cooking them in two stages can be a positive thing too. HiLo48 (talk) 04:25, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

mini edit war on cancer

Alexbrn brought the information on cancer risk up to snuff with WP:MEDRS in this dif and was reverted by Takeaway in this dif with edit note "re-added Dutch research, removed by previous edit, showing the contrary, that it can increase the chance of kidney cancer", and was re-reverted by Alexbrn in this dif with edit note: " Yes, but it fails WP:MEDRS - we need quality sourcing for health content." And fortunately it stopped there.

Takeaway started a discussion on Alexbrn's Talk page that I saw, so I have started this. Takeaway, the dutch study is a primary source (see Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine)#Definitions) and we do not base health-related content in WP on primary sources, nor on news reports about them, be those news reports in The Daily Mail or Nature - they are still just news reports. We based health-related content on statements by major medical and scientific bodies or on reviews in the biomedical literature. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 15:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

baton?

Why do we define a common word with a word that is, certainly in its use here, not common? My American Heritage Dictionary has no definition of "baton" that fits. Likewise, the Merriam-Webster's online dictionary has no definition of "baton" that would be appropriate in our sentence defining French fries. Only by extension, can one use any of these definitions to make sense of the sentence -- and then it would indicate rounded rather than cuboid strips. How about some-thing like " strips / cuboids or cylindrical cuts of potato? Kdammers (talk) 01:07, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

See "batonnet" (little baton) at List of culinary knife cuts. Just plain Bill (talk) 15:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Potato Wedges

The opening paragraph states that in North America there is no distinction between the thickness of fries however, in North America they DO actually call the thicker-cut fries "potato wedges" so there is a distinction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.243.32.83 (talk) 14:33, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Aren't potato wedges a different thing altogether? They have a triangular cross-section. Sophie means wisdom (talk) 15:00, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
Also, what about Steak Fries? While I also typically see something more than a salt seasoning on items labeled as Steak Fries, I'm not sure seasoning makes a difference. In any event, there are also "Shoestring potatoes" for the very small ones, which makes the statement also incorrect regarding North American usage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.155.225.231 (talk) 13:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Not to mention waffer fries... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.12 (talk) 19:54, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 June 2015

The tornado fries link in the beginning is not working. 50.46.224.230 (talk) 22:18, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

The section and link have now been removed as promotional and was sourced to their website.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 23:16, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Chips as main meal

I know that it says under the course served, it's rarely served as a main course, however as I've been in Britain the majority of my time, in Aberdeen, Burntisland, Edinburgh, Glasgow, London, Bognor Regis and Chichester, I have seen many people eat chips on it's own, as a main meal.

While I don't doubt the facts about chips being served as anything, it's far more common than rare, being a main meal, oddly enough.

~RichardKT —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.215.16.47 (talk) 00:16, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Given the quality of food in the UK, I wouldn't be surprised if someone were to eat a load of fries as a meal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.12 (talk) 19:52, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
If a Yank cooks a chip in the oven, is that what you call a bake? I only ask because you sound well-experienced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.138.64 (talk) 00:12, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Americans don't call them chips

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on French fries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 October 2015

Please Change: The first chips fried in the UK were on the site of Oldham's Tommyfield Market in 1860.[29] A blue plaque in Oldham marks the origin of the fish and chip shop and fast food industries in Britain.[30] To: The first chips fried in the UK were from a wooden hut at Mossley market in 1863.[29] A blue plaque in Oldham celebrates the origin of the fish and chip shop and fast food industries in Britain.[30] Because: The source that is quoted [30] states: "In Lancashire, John Lees is celebrated as the creator of Britain's favourite dish. He began selling fish and chips in a wooden hut at Mossley market in 1863. Today, in Tommyfield in Oldham, a blue plaque put up by the town council commemorates Lees' frying of the first British chip and the start of fish and chip shops and fast food in Britain."

The source states that "He began selling fish and chips in a wooden hut at Mossley market" not Tommyfield market. It only states that the plaque "[commemorates] Lees' frying of....." and this is because Mossley used to be an area of Oldham, though it is now a part of Tameside. 70.68.26.10 (talk) 18:52, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Partly done: Source 29, Chaloner, W. H.; Henderson, W. O. (1990). Industry and Innovation: Selected Essays. (https://books.google.com/books?id=EqXjvZoUidkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22Industry+and+Innovation:+Selected+Essays%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCUQ6AEwAGoVChMI0PTU9s7gyAIVQuwmCh0FTAA3#v=onepage&q=tommyfield&f=false), is being used to source Tommyfield as the earliest. However, this is wrong, as the source says 1880, not 1860, for Tommyfield.
However, on preceding page, the same source notes that Mrs "Granny' Duce, in one of the Westing Riding towns, had been selling since 1854, and claims that Mrs Duce was the first person to fry chips for public sale. This is earlier than the Mossley market report. -- ferret (talk) 17:14, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

There is no heated debate about where fries where invented.

The article wrongly claims that there is a big feud between Belgium and France on who invented them first.

Anyone in France would directly associate "frites" with Belgium. Fries are to Belgium what frog legs are to France or pastas to Italy.

Only in Northern America do they talk about "French Fries". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.69.135.88 (talk) 13:37, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Right. The home of the French fry...makes sense as that is where the potato is from. We'll settle on America and move along to edit other things. Oh, we also invented the tater tot, hash browns, potato chips....
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 23:11, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on French fries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:27, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on French fries. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:04, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Air Frying

I believe the section on cooking methods should include a mention of air fryers.#REDIRECT air fryer Haryadoon (talk) 07:14, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

'Shoestring'

The intro to the article claims that thin fried are called 'shoestring' in various anglophone countries. This is certainly not the case in the UK, where the term is seldom, if ever, used. Could someone who knows please adjust this appropriately? Also, the major distinction is that the term 'fries' is only used to refer to thin batons in the UK, whereas fried refers to all size batons in the US. This is an issue of fundamental importance and should be clear in the intro. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.156.212.1 (talk) 16:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I thought that outside of American fast food chains, and Americanised youth, these were called chips rather than fries - as in fish and chips.101.98.74.13 (talk) 08:52, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Also another variation should be added: Boardwalk Fries. These are mostly an East Coast US term I think for shoestring fries that have some skin left on them and heavily salted.96.56.198.62 (talk) 15:48, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Shoestring potatoes ("potatoes cut into long, narrow strips and fried crisp in deep fat" - Webster's new World Dictionary second college edition) are not, in my American experience, considered french fries. They are often served cold, not usually dressed in ketchup, and simply a different but related form of cooked potatoes. A decent American french fry has at least some mush in the middle. A shoestring potato absolutely does not. One American company, Pik-Nik, says they have been making them for 75 years (http://pik-nik.com/shoestrings.htm). Perhaps their original company invented them.

Shoestring potatoes are also sold by street vendors in South Korea. (A number of articles and books about korea in the 1950s (e.g., https://books.google.com/books?id=R6Q_q3Wp9goC&pg=PA125&lpg=PA125&dq=shoestring+potatoes+in+south+korea&source=bl&ots=LpKddv0hrv&sig=EA1-49h6na2NKvY6tyJRuoVA1EE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi33Zmcnv7OAhVTxCYKHTACBgc4ChDoAQgpMAM#v=onepage&q=shoestring%20potatoes%20in%20south%20korea&f=false) mention Americans in Korea eating them, so maybe that's how they came to Korea.Kdammers (talk) 21:58, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Bocuse

Ten years ago, I added a reference to Paul Bocuse as a source for the two-bath method. A few days ago, I saw that this reference was still in the main text of the article, with the Bocuse book in the bibliography, and I reformatted the reference to be a footnote, which is more appropriate. Since then, another editor elevated this simple reference to the claims that Bocuse made the two-bath method standard. This is demonstrably false. The two-bath method has long been standard in France, as documented in the well known "bible" of bourgeois cuisine, La bonne cuisine de Madame E. Saint-Ange, which was published when Paul Bocuse was one year old. (The reference to Mme. Saint-Ange has been in the article for a while now.) The same editor now wants to highlight Bocuse among the chefs who recommend the two-bath method. Which is silly, since just about every chef recommends the two-bath method. Bocuse is a hugely important figure in the development of modern cuisine, and modern French cuisine in particular, but he is not especially important in the history or the cooking methods for French fries. --Macrakis (talk) 02:18, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

British section

The British call french fries 'chips'. I get that. The article describes what other countries call french fries thusly : "Fries are very popular in Belgium, where they are known as frieten (in Dutch) or frites (in French), and the Netherlands, where they are known as patat in the north and, in the south, friet.[29] In Belgium, fries are sold in shops called friteries (French), frietkot/frituur (Dutch), or Fritüre/Frittüre (German). "

My question is, why do the british get special treatment, and the article can't call them fries when talking about british. British is just another variant of english, no better nor worse than American English, so I don't see why that variant gets special treatment in this (and ever so many other) article(s). Thus, I am changing it to reflect ENGVAR. Please do not change back without making a consensus on why this article, with respect to the british, should violate a big policy such as ENGVAR> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA36:5800:8C18:72E9:2CD3:2E3F (talk) 23:12, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Chips are described as being different. Instead of "chips", the section would otherwise be forced to use "the type of French fries from the British isles". As the term chips has been explained, it is more efficient to continue using that term. - Takeaway (talk) 23:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Chips are no different than french fries. If they were, then they would obviously need their own article. British exceptionalism may think they are different, but they are cut fried potatoes....french fries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA36:5800:4B2:F624:FA77:24FF (talk) 06:32, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
The article describes the difference. Stop trolling. Graham87 07:39, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
I cleaned up the British section, as it wasn't consistent. AmEn french fries are the same as BrEn chips. If not, then obviously, Chips(Brtish Foodstuff) should exit. Potato Chips in AmEn are the Same as BrEn "crisps". It is not the fault of the reader that Britain decided to rename some food. If the article is to be consistent, I believe my changes are appropriate. It's not trolling, and I urge you, Grahm, to try to look beyond parochialism. If you don't agree, please bring the issue here, and discuss it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA36:5800:6B:F3FC:60B8:7BC1 (talk) 08:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC) B::
I note that other british editors keep reverting this, without a reason. Is there a valid policy reason why the british section gets different rules? Please make the case known here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:c7d:ca36:5800:4829:e284:e591:f1ec (talk) 22:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Vandalism, including deliberately disruptive editing, gets reverted. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
American editors as well.--TMCk (talk) 23:44, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I've tried to enlarge the "origins" section, but basically, French fried potatoes were slices of potato shallow fried on both sides. The origin of the deep fried batons now known as "French fries" in America is unclear (perhaps someone can enlighten us) but they were common in Britain by 1870 as "fried chipped potatoes" whilst at the time "French fried potatoes/French fries" still referred to the thin, shallow fried potato discs. At some point the name transferred to the deep fried potato baton, but "chips" was well established as the name in Britain Northern rocks 20:38, 24 January 2017 (UTC).

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on French fries. 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:

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) 15:53, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2017

Frenched Vegetables Frenching also refers to a method of preparing vegetables, such as beans, peppers or potatoes, by cutting them into long thin strips for even cooking 194.78.141.2 (talk) 16:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Murph9000 (talk) 17:17, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Variants

Fries With The Works (or FWTW) -- a dish consisting of fries (fresh cut or frozen), topped with gravy, ground beef, and peas invented in the Canadian province of Prince Edward Island [1]MereFM (talk) 13:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 15:12, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
  1. ^ https://frieswiththeworks.ca/What-Is-FWTW

GAN is the Future

I am planning on Nominating this for a Good Article in the near future. All help is appreciated. AmericanAir88 (talk) 16:58, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:French fries/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kostas20142 (talk · contribs) 17:34, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.

All relevant issues found during this review have been fixed.

1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).

All relevant issues found during this review have been fixed per the comments below.

2c. it contains no original research.

The article contains no original research.

2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

No copyright infringements found in the article. The Copyvio detector reported a potential violation, however it is a backwards copy. The findings has been added to the talk page to avoid future confusion.

3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.

All main aspects of the topic are covered. Improvements have been made per the sections below.

3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

The article stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary details.

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

There have been a few issues but all resolved.

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Not affected by edit wars.

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.

All images are in commons and appropriately tagged. There are no non-free images that would require a fair use rationale.

6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

All relevant, captions are ok.

7. Overall assessment.

The article currently meets the GA criteria.

Comments

  • links
  1. Please remove Poutines and steak frites from see also section; They are already linked and mentioned in prose.
    Frietmuseum as well  Done
  2. many articles are linked more than once. For example:
    1. McDonald's:3+  Done
    2. salt, vinegar, mayonnaise: 2  Done
    3. Onion rings  Done
    4. Flemish  Done
Removed Duplinks of all I could, please tell me if there are any more. AmericanAir88 (talk) 00:41, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
  1. Please keep only one each (excluding infobox's if you wish so)  Done
  2. Accompaniments section is severely overlinked. Practically, almost the whole section is blue. Please keep only the most important ones and remove any all the duplicated, per above.  Done Removed many obvious links, while keeping more rarer foods.

Rephrases

  1. The exact times of the two baths depend on the size of the potatoes(in preparation) → The exact duration of each of the two baths depends on the size of the potatoes  Done

MOS:WORDS related

  • The Etymology section appears to be a bit WP:EDITORIAL. Could you rephrase these parts?  Done I reworked the sentence starters and an unnecessary sentence. AmericanAir88 (talk) 00:49, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Belgium section includes weasel words such as some claim that, a common belief is, and WP:ALLEGED words such supposedly, which compromise the article's neutrality. Please re-write the section after reading MOS:WORDS.  Done

Other

  • United States section is unreferenced.  Done
  • Techniques section should be incorporated into the rest of the article and removed.  Done
  • In infobox France and Belgium are presented as the two potential countries of origin, however in prose, Spain is also included.  Done
  • I really have my concerns regarding structure. Culinary origin section is consisted of 4 sub-sections, of which, Subsequent history appears a bit unrelated to the rest, Spain not well-connected with the rest. Could you please fix this? (or try another structure)  Done - Merged the two and paraphrased AmericanAir88 (talk) 01:37, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kostas20142: I will get right on it. AmericanAir88 (talk) 01:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

  • I found another"citation needed" in health aspects  Done
  • Please take a look at the supplementary comments below and discuss them
I'll get right on it. AmericanAir88 (talk) 16:26, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

additional comments by David notMD

COMMENTS: Health aspects needs details and citations on the discontinuation of partially unsaturated vegetable oils for purpose of eliminating trans fatty acids. Too many countries - does this article really need Scandinavia? What is missing entirely is some sense of consumption per capita by country, and international trade. If there are 5,000 KFCs and 2,000 McDonalds in China, someone is eating a lot of French fries. Is that from China-grown potatoes of imported frozen from U.S. and Canada? David notMD (talk) 00:29, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done

MORE COMMENTS: What type of potato makes the best French fries? (Hint, https://idahopotato.com/ says its the Russet Burbank, although some chains prefer the Russet Norkotah.) Same site says that potatoes fresh out of the ground can have too high a water content - resulting in soggy fries - so preference is for spuds that have been in storage for a while. Most chains no longer start with fresh potatoes, but rather buy frozen. And you may want to find a way to differentiate true French fries from stuff reconstituted from mashed, dehydrated potato into TaterTots and other abominations. David notMD (talk) 21:05, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

 Done

INFORMATION SOURCES: The statistics yearbook, page 81, shows that 35% of U.S. production ends up as frozen fries, and which countries exported to, and what is exported. https://www.flipsnack.com/nationalpotatocouncil/2017-potato-statistical-yearbook-final.html The TRADE part of this site https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/crops/vegetables-pulses/potatoes.aspx#potatoes states that in 2009, the U.S. exported three billion pounds of frozen french fries. I believe lower in more recent years, as China now growing more for in-country consumption.
Glad to see this (French fries as business, not just as food) being addressed. I defer to reviewer on what is nice versus necessary to complete the GA. David notMD (talk) 04:52, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kostas20142: Any more? AmericanAir88 (talk) 03:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Closing comments

@AmericanAir88: Congratulations, the article has been improved significantly during this review and can pass the GA review. Special thank to David notMD for his useful comments suggestions and edits. This collaboration has been productive, and would be really nice if you both worked on improving the article further (why not FA). --Kostas20142 (talk) 12:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

@Kostas20142: Thank you so much! I will highly consider FA. Do not hesitate to ask if there is anything I can do for you. AmericanAir88 (talk) 21:46, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Incorrect Nutrition Information

Hello. I am new to Wikipedia, and I noticed a mistake under the "Health aspects" section and citation 48. When you click on citation 48, and go to the McDonald's USA website, and then select size "large" under french fries, you will see that the nutrition facts stated in this article are incorrect. Please adjust them to fit the updated nutrition information as displayed on the website. Thank you. Furthermore, under this health aspects section, it may be beneficial to include other healthier french fry cooking methods such as an air fryer. --Efishers (talk) 17:26, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

@Efishers: Information has been corrected. AmericanAir88 (talk) 03:41, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

In 1680, pomme de terre meant Jerusalem artichoke

Aside from all the other problems with the Belgian "proof" of priority, in the seventeenth century, the French term "pomme de terre" referred to the Jerusalem artichoke (taupinaumbour), not the potato. Le Dictionnaire royal, augmenté de nouveau, et enrichi d'un grand nombre d'expressions élégantes ... Dernière édition, nouvellement augmentée de la plus grande partie des termes de tous les arts... Par le R. P. François Pomey, 1716, p. 928. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k96365651/f944.image.r=%22pomme%20de%20terre%22?rk=107296;4 Never mind that the potato remained unknown in Belgium for long after the start of the eighteenth century. 23.113.53.110 (talk) 00:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

First mentions of long squared fried potatoes

Insert under "Belgium and the Netherlands", after "However, other sources disagree." (Ideally, the whole paragraph would be rewritten, since the cookbook references clearly predate the initial explanation offered.)

Food historian Jim Chevallier writes the following in his entry on "Frites":

"Since a Frenchman (Parmentier) first made the potato popular, it is not surprising that the first reference to fried potatoes appears to come from France: in 1775, investigators there found fried potatoes in a dish. Through the nineteenth century, fried potatoes became common enough that songs and engravings took the “Fried Potato Vendor” as a popular subject. But at first these were cut in rounds. In 1865, Gogué, in France, wrote to cut them either round or “in long and squared pieces”; in 1870, Cauderlier, in Belgium, also offered both options. Given the lag between practice and print, one cannot say that the five years’ difference is significant; the most likely hypothesis is that the practice grew up spontaneously and spread across both countries." Jim Chevallier, A History of the Food of Paris: From Roast Mammoth to Steak Frites, 2018, ISBN 1442272821, pp. 186-187. 23.113.53.110 (talk) 15:32, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 15:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Use lower case

The article should use "french fries", not "French fries". According to MOS:CAPS, "Wikipedia relies on sources to determine what is conventionally capitalized; only words and phrases that are consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources are capitalized in Wikipedia. This is not the case with "french fries", as many if not most sources don't capitalize it. The AP Stylebook and Chicago Manual of Style recommend using lower case [1] and most major dictionaries have it that way. [2]

There has been almost no discussion of this on the talk page. The archive contains only a couple of comments that lower case should be used. For the first five years since it was created, the article used lower case. It was changed to uppercase in an unexplained and undiscussed edit in 2006, by an IP editor: Special:Diff/60947961/60951058. Considering the above, I have changed it back to lower case. --IamNotU (talk) 12:47, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

According to the Oxford Advanced Dictionary, the correct style is French fries. Denisarona (talk) 19:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Modern dictionaries are meant to be descriptive of usage, not presciptive (as opposed to style manuals that are more so), so it's not necessarily the "correct" style. The OED 2 also has "French fries", though it seems to be based on fairly old attestations, 1918 and 1951. It does seem like it would be more consistent with things like French toast and French dressing, which are capitalized for example by Merriam Webster and the American Heritage dictionary, despite them both using the lower-case "french fry". Some people have explained the discrepancy as due to a shortening of "french-cut fries", but that's debatable. In any case, MOS:CAPS is quite clear: "Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization" and requires "a substantial majority" of reliable sources to use a capitalized form, before Wikipedia uses it. Even only among dictionaries, Oxford is in the minority, see the Grammarphobia link above. --IamNotU (talk) 09:44, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
The ngram for this is interesting. In the 1990s the consensus seemed to have firmly settled on lower case (beaaring in mind that some of the uc results are the beginning of a sentence) but more recently that has entirely turned around. SpinningSpark 21:46, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Walking snack

Hi Spinningspark, I'm puzzled by your assertion that fries are a popular "walking snack" in Germany. I don't see people walking along eating them. They are usually consumed directly at the Imbissbude, where there are ledges and waist high tables (Stehtische) provided. There are some foods that are easy to consume whilst walking, but a pile of chips slathered in mayo and ketchup, eaten with a dinky wooden or plastic fork isn't one of them in my experience. What have you seen? Kind regards Guffydrawers (talk) 06:32, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

I've moved this from my talk page because it belongs here. What I have seen, or what you have seen is not very relevant. That's the epitome of WP:OR. But for what it's worth, I have seen people eating chips in the street in Germany. This young woman in Germany does not seem to be having the problems you claim, nor does this one in Cologne. In any case, that's not the reason I reverted you, and I made no assertion one way or the other on the accuracy of the claim. I reverted because you alleged that the sense was unclear, when, of course, it is not in the context it was given. The point is now moot since another editor has now reworded the sentence. SpinningSpark 16:23, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
I'm afraid I don't understand how photos of people eating chips outdoors support the phrase "walking snack", which was unclear to me and hence excised by me, but never mind, I don't doubt good faith. Best wishes, Guffydrawers (talk) 07:17, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Move to 'Fries'

Almost every country in the world in the world uses the term "fries", only one or two countries (USA, Canada) use the term "french fries". This page should be moved to "Fries". (Also, it's highly dubious as to whether french fries and fries are even the same thing - i would say that "fries" is a general term for fried potato chip (as seen in belgium, france, the netherlands, the usa, etc), and "french fries" is a specific term from the USA for a very thinly sliced fry.) This page is about fries in general, so it should use the more general term, as this article is not USA-specific. People have raised similar points on the talk page before. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 04:27, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

And then there's Chips (hot food). This article describes that as the name used in British and Commonwealth English. We certainly buy "chips" here in Australia, especially when we buy fish and chips, although American food chains and some of those copying their style use "fries". I just checked our biggest supermarket chain. They sell Frozen Potato French Fries AND Frozen Crinkle Cut Potato Chips. Hungry Jack's, an Australian franchise of Burger King, sells chips. If that's simple and clear for you, you're a better and less confused person than I am. HiLo48 (talk) 05:09, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I know...But 'fries' is a far more general and appropriate term than 'french fries' - even in Australia. There's no reason why this article should be titled under such a specific american term, when almost all countries -- including the usa -- use the term 'fries'. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 05:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
How did you get that out of what I wrote? American fast food chains sell "fries". Our supermarkets sell "French fries". That hardly makes the former "far more general". HiLo48 (talk) 05:36, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Only when referring to a very specific style of thin-chip. This page is not only about thinly sliced american french fries, but is also about the fries present in the netherlands, france, belgium etc. Obviously at McDonalds in Australia, they use the term 'french fries' to refer to that style of american fry, because it's an american food. This page is not meant to only be about american fries, it's meant to be about all fries. French fries are a subset of fries. This article is about fries in general, not that specific subset. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 05:45, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Now I'm even more confused. HiLo48 (talk) 06:02, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
French fries are a specific subset of fries. This page should use the broader term, because it's not only about the thin-style of american fry. In countries like Belgium, France, etc they eat fries not french fries. I've even lived in Australia for a number of years so i can guarantee you that the term fries is used more generally whereas the term french fry would only be used to refer to a very specific style of thin-fry as per the definition from the Cambridge dictionary. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 06:04, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
"French fries are a specific subset of fries." That's not what the article says. HiLo48 (talk) 06:19, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
The article is wrong, i am trying to change it...understand? The article also says french fries and chips are the same thing, this is blatantly wrong. That's like saying that pho and laksa are the exact same thing by virtue of the fact that they are both soups. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 06:27, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
"The article is wrong, i am trying to change it...understand?" Well, not really. I will admit to some confusion. Your heading suggests you want to change the name, not the contents of the article. HiLo48 (talk) 21:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
There are many ways in which the article is bad. I am changing one problem at a time. Regardless of whether french fries and fries are the same food in all circumstances, fries is still the best name for the article no matter what. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 05:31, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
My view on the term 'chips', is that it needs it's own page. Chips cooked in the british style are an entirely different food and are not synonymous with french fries (people have said this on the talk page before). Nonetheless, this is irrelevant to the current discussion (whether fries is a better title than french fries). Apples&Manzanas (talk) 05:31, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
If you're so bent on moving the article, I suggest starting a move discussion. Make sure you follow the directions there so the discussion is formatted correctly. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:36, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2020

Change British and Commonwealth english to "British, commonwealth and Hiberno english" 213.86.138.115 (talk) 19:59, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done added Hiberno-English link. — xaosflux Talk 18:17, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Chips (British English)

Although French fries are technically a type of chip, "chips" is definitely NOT the British English equivalent word for "French fries" - they are two different things. Chips are thick cut fries that you get with fish and chips, French fries are thin cut fries you get, e.g. at McDonalds. If you got French fries served with "fish and chips" you would be confused, at best. 31.54.34.51 (talk) 10:22, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Actually chips are more like what would be commonly called steak fries in the U.S., but still basically fries. Fish and chips are usually called fish and chips here in the U.S. even if what you get looks more like french fries, not thick cut chips - interestingly enough the world goes on, and so wouldn't get too bent out of shape about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.162 (talk) 14:29, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Still basically fries? Not in UK English. I happened to be in the US very recently, and ordered the "Traditional English Fish and Chips" in a diner. I got fries, not chips. I pointed this out to the waiter. He agreed the chef has it wrong. What probably frustrates most non-Americans the most is the ignorance of many (not all) Americans about what English chips are, while being confident they do know what they are talking about. HiLo48 (talk) 23:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
What could be more British than going to another country, ordering British food, then complaining when they got it wrong. -Taras (talk) 09:30, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
I am not British. HiLo48 (talk) 02:37, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Ignoring the above jingosim, Chips and Fries are two completly seperate dishes and should have their own articles. Fries are only sold at American fast food outlets such as McDonalds and Burger King they are very thin and laced with sugar. Chips are thick cuts of potatoes made in homes up and down the country and are a staple of the British diet. 80.0.45.128 (talk) 10:10, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

I also agree that these are two separate foods. Here are some sources that effect: 1, 2. Apples&Manzanas (talk) 22:19, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Remove « French »

Most people in the world call these « fries », not « French fries ». Also, nothing proves that they come from France. Some argue that they come from Belgium initially. It makes no sense to keep calling them « French fries »... Ced939 (talk) 14:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

You're bringing up two different issues here:
  • What the most common name is. WP policy does say that we should use the most commonly used name (WP:UCRN), but it is hard to determine what that is.
  • Whether they came from France originally or not. That is actually quite irrelevant. There are lots of things which have misleading names: Russian dressing doesn't come from Russia, the Spanish flu didn't come from Spain; Crab Rangoon doesn't come from Rangoon. Still, those are the common names, and that's what we use.
As for the most common name, "fries" by itself is certainly very common in the US. But I'm not sure how you could prove that it's the most common in the US or worldwide. For example, the McDonalds site calls them both "fries" and "French fries". Ideas? --Macrakis (talk) 17:40, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
This was recently discussed, see Move to 'Fries' above. There is little or no support for moving the page. See also: Talk:Gyro (food)#French fries never used, ordinary fries are, and the closing admin's comments. I don't think there's any point in opening this up again. --IamNotU (talk) 18:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

reconstituted potatoes

I didn't see anything about processed potatoes, where the potatoes are pulverized, dried and then reconstituted. While I can't find any references to this, I think some companies do this. Am I wrong, or is there a citable source for this? Kdammers (talk) 13:15, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Undated comment

"The 510 calories come from 66 g of carbohydrates, 24 g of fat, 7 g of protein and 350 mg of sodium." This should be re-written; sodium has no calories.

British chips (again)

Chips in Britain are a staple of family meals. They are not a dinner party item. Fancy recipes calling for them to be cooked twice or even three times are irrelevant to the general statement of their use. No one has time for that at children's tea time. One of the sources I put in says this quite plainly – "So what's the difference between British chips and French fries? (Okay, frites.) Chips are cooked only once and therefore are a bit less crisp than their French cousins, the better for them to absorb condiments". Anyone familiar with British culture knows this is right. SpinningSpark 09:34, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

The section is about chips in general in the UK and Ireland, not only "the way a lot of people make them at home". Yes, there are some sources that describe them as being cooked only once, but there are many other equally reliable sources that say otherwise. I added content about chips that are pre-cooked before a final fry, with highly reliable sources, for example a British professional chef's training manual, and the BBC's recipe for chips, which is also to be prepared in homes, and no doubt is, by some undefined proportion of people. The same for the third reference, from the "British Cookbook - Great British Recipes: English, Welsh, Scottish, Irish Recipes", with a recipe for "Perfect homemade fish and chips". There are many other sources giving such a preparation method for homemade chips, such as Jamie Oliver's "Homemade fish & chips" [3]. Additionally, this is a very common method in chip shops, pubs, etc., according to, for example, The Guardian [4] and many others. Per WP:NPOV:

Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources. The relative prominence of each viewpoint among Wikipedia editors or the general public is not relevant and should not be considered.

The statement that this is "irrelevant" doesn't appear to be based on core content policies, and "I am British" is not a valid argument for removal of well-sourced content.
Furthermore, the entire series of edits I made, including other content and references,[5] has been reverted without justification. This includes among other things a more balanced and complete explanation of the British and Irish context and usage of the terms "french fries" and "chips". There is no debate that in British English (though certainly not in American English), thick-cut chips are never called "french fries". However, a statement that thin-cut ones are never called "chips" is demonstrably untrue. I replaced the recently-added statement that "In the UK, chips are considered a separate item to french fries" because it's too black-and-white, and is called into question by the very source used to support it (Oxford Companion to Food) saying: "Latter-day changes are in the main American with the development of frozen chips by McDonald's in the 1960s." I have also provided further sources showing that it is in fact quite common for Brits to refer to the McDonald's style as "chips". The argument that no true Scotsman would call a thinner cut "chips" is also not valid. Most consider what McDonalds markets as "french fries" to be a type of chip, even if many would agree that they are not "proper" chips. I am asking that my edits be restored, in accordance with WP:NPOV and other policies. --IamNotU (talk) 15:15, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Using a reliable source that directly says British chips are cooked once to support a statement that chips are normally cooked once is a proper use of a source. Using a recipe, or even multiple recipes, that require chips to be cooked twice to support a statement that claims chips are cooked once or twice is WP:SYNTH. There are recipes for all sorts of off-the-wall variations of all kinds of dishes. It does not prove anything unless the author explicitly states that this is the canonical method. I'm fine with a claim that professional establishments usually cook chips twice – if there is a source directly stating that – but I have doubts that is even true. The fact that fries are sometimes called chips is beside the point, it does not detract from the two being considered different. That's just a question of language, not of substance. I reverted your edit in its entirety because you entirely changed the structure of the paragraph making a partial revert problematic. SpinningSpark 17:34, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Just because a source is reliable doesn't mean that it is unconditionally true or unimpeachable. The Tom Jaine article (in the OCF) in fact it does not say that British chips are only cooked once -- it does say that the British chips are fatter and cooked at a higher temperature, and it also says that french fries are cooked twice, but it does not say that British ones are never cooked twice.
The Yarvin book is a cookbook, just like the other cookbooks, and I see no reason to weight it more heavily than the others.
It is futile to hope for a definitive statement on how to cook the canonical British chip. Recipes no doubt vary, as do circumstances. See my essay Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Original, authentic, and traditional. Some may be cooked in a rush "at children's tea time", others may be cooked in chip shops, still others in restaurants. My guess, by the way, would be that many commercial cookeries cook them twice out of expedience, because half-cooked potatoes can be "finished" faster than raw potatoes. --Macrakis (talk) 19:50, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
@IamNotU and Spinningspark: I plan to restore IamNotU's version because it is well documented, and the revert removed material which is not relevant to the single/double frying issue. Just because it's inconvenient ("problematic") to perform a partial edit doesn't mean that a blanket revert is appropriate. In any case, I don't see that there's good evidence to assert that the single-bath method (or any particular method) is canonical. WP:NPOV says that we reflect the variety of reputable opinions in our sources. --Macrakis (talk) 18:17, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Revert of edit

@Zefr: please explain this edit. You claimed lack of RS and HOWTO in the edit summary. I'm not seeing what the user is supposed to have added. It all looks like minor style and citation fixes to me. I can't identify any substantive text that added that might have raised those objections. SpinningSpark 17:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

One more comment; it is correct to have a nb space in front of °C so the removal of that at least was properly reverted. SpinningSpark 17:12, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Self-reverted. Correct that it was not a source issue with the prior editor and the changes were mainly for syntax. Indicated by the section notices, the article has generally weak or an absence of WP:RS sources, with abundant "howto" content - WP:NOTHOWTO. I checked, and found no good new sources to add. Zefr (talk) 18:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

France/Quebec

I lived in france for 9 years and never once did i see them on the menu as "pommes de terre frites"

"pommes frites" and "frites" are the most common ways of them being listed, and thus should be placed before "pommes de terre frites", or better yet - just remove "pommes de terre frites"

That is true. Even the wordind "pommes frites" is far less common than "frites", at least in France.
Oh and there is a real mistake in the article. "Aiguillette" does NOT refer to french fries. An "aiguillette" is meat that you cut in a way to give it a tapered shape.
"Alumette" is also pretty uncommon but not incorrect . Ellister (talk) 09:06, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Australia

A recent edit was made to the second paragraph in the main body, last sentence: “ In Australia, a popular flavouring added to chips is chicken salt”

It is missing the period at the end, but as it’s semi-protected I can’t edit it. I also feel the “chicken salt” could be tied in with the previous sentences on toppings. That seems more appropriate as no other country is given a specific topping in this section. Ajkennin (talk) 02:47, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Poutine

It says in the article: "French fries are the main ingredient in the Canadian/Québécois dish known (in both Canadian English and Canadian French) as poutine, a dish consisting of fried potatoes covered with cheese curds and brown gravy."

Poutine is not a canadian dish. It is a Québécois dish.

What country is Quebec in again? Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 15:02, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Saying it comes from Quebec is more precise than saying it comes from Canada... Though I'm a Québécois so might be little biased here :) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Might it also be an Acadian dish? I have enjoyed the canonical fries/curds/gravy form in maritime Canada, specifically PEI. Then again, I've enjoyed poutine râpée in the US, but prepared by an Acadian. Just plain Bill (talk) 04:16, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Batons

Could someone please define baton. A google search brings up a stick used by orchestra conductors and a stick used by police. Is a potato baton shaped like a conductor's baton? Any info or a picture would help. N0w8st8s (talk) 04:03, 27 July 2021 (UTC)n0w8st8s

See List of culinary knife cuts#Strip cuts. Just plain Bill (talk) 05:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

"Hot chips" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Hot chips. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 31#Hot chips until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 20:15, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 September 2021

Change origin country to Belgium instead or 'Belgium or France' Name the title as 'French fries or fries' instead of just 'French fries' (Not everyone calls them 'French fries') Theofficialjjww (talk) 21:38, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Absolutely not on both counts. If the origin is disputed (as it is) then the infobox should not be taking sides in the dispute. It must follow what the article says, which should explain the dispute. And by the way, many English people would dispute that chips are the same thing as French fries because they are a different cut, and consequently consider them an English invention. I recently witnessed a blazing row in a cafe after a woman was served fries instead of chips after she had first confirmed with the server that they really were chips before ordering (non-English server who did not understand the issue). On the proposed name change, I agree that not everyone calls them French fries, but we simply do not put alternative names in the title per the WP:OTHERNAMES guideline. SpinningSpark 09:07, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Belgian

They are Belgian so can someone change the name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.166.129.37 (talk) 16:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

@109.166.129.37 never were Belgian so no need to change the name Esteban Outeiral Dias (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Controversial according to the article, and irrelevant as far as the title of the article goes. They are not called "Belgian fries", regardless of where they originated. Meters (talk) 19:53, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

French fries

Origin is really Ireland because the potato was the main food source for Ireland 98.52.92.228 (talk) 19:00, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

So? That has nothing to do with the origin of the dish. Meters (talk) 20:08, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
@98.52.92.228 I mean potatoes at some point were the main food source for many countries including France, Spain, etc.. but that has nothing to do with 🍟 whatsoever Esteban Outeiral Dias (talk) 21:20, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

History of French fries

This is to explain why I modified the introduction to the article.

Pierre Leclerc, a Belgian historian, revealed the true history of the French fries.

Invented in Paris in the early 19th century, they were a very popular dish. Until the 20th century where fries started to get rarer. There's recipes of French fries in old 1855 cook book.

Frédérick Krieger exported fries to Belgium and started his business.

Until 1985, it was unanimous, fries were French. But a story created around the year 1980 became more and more famous, the story that fries were actually Belgian.

Frédérick Krieger named his fries "la pomme de terre frite à l'instar de Paris" which can be simplified to "Parisian-like fries".


Sources:

A Belgian article about the French origin of fries, https://www.rtbf.be/article/cuisine-la-frite-vient-elle-de-france-ou-de-belgique-10137480

Pierre Leclerc, https://www.ladepeche.fr/2021/10/18/les-frites-sont-elles-belges-ou-francaises-voici-enfin-la-reponse-9861237.php

Frédérick Krieger's story, https://www.lefigaro.fr/langue-francaise/actu-des-mots/2018/08/01/37002-20180801ARTFIG00017-non-les-frites-ne-sont-pas-belges.php Esteban Outeiral Dias (talk) 19:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

hey guys, me again
Pierre's website seems to be down forever, so if any of you could replace the link for this one:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220818174400/https://www.histoiredelafrite.com/
👍 thanks Esteban Outeiral Dias (talk) 12:37, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
I forgot to mention; we're talking about modern fries.

Since the 18th century, traces of fried potatoes can be found (not to mention that back then Belgium didn't even existed). But modern French fries are different that those older ones.

That's the same reason why we say Pizzas are Italian despite Greeks making food similar to pizzas first, with their plankuntos. Or Chinese (or at least Asian) people inventing pasta before Italians too, but modern pasta being consider Italians either way. Esteban Outeiral Dias (talk) 19:24, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

You have multiple sources, but they are not independent. They are all simply short mentions of one guy's opinion of the history. He may be correct, but one book is not enough to justify you arbitrarily rewriting the article to remove the dispute. If the book is a reliable source you can add it to the article neutrally, as one more piece. Meters (talk) 20:03, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Leclercq seems to be a serious food historian (see his list of lectures, seminars, etc.) and his history sounds plausible. It would be nice if he had written up his results in a serious book or journal that got reviewed by other food historians, but for now, we just have his online posts and some newspaper articles.
But let's be real. The ridiculous Jo Gérard story has been in the article for years, even though it sounds more like a hoax than history. Does anyone believe that he found a family manuscript, and then never showed it to anyone? Gérard was a journalist and gives no evidence of having done real research.
That said, the added material needs to be tightened up and made more encyclopedic in tone. --Macrakis (talk) 01:11, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Agreed. Jo Gérard claimed to have a personal family document that supported the Belgian origin, but apparently never showed it publicly? And the source we use for this does not appear to be reliable either. It's a defunct domain called "Frites.be" (Belgian fries) and was a personal website. Hugues Henry, a journalist and the writer of the article, held the trademark along with a website creator. Searching on Frites.be now takes you to https://homefrithome.myshopify.com/ , which is a commercial website specializing in all things fries, owned by Hugues Henry again.
Lets just nuke that entire story. Meters (talk) 02:31, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Unfortunately, once a story becomes widely known -- regardless of why -- we are pretty much forced to mention it in the article. I call this "defensive editing". Otherwise, people who learn the Jo Gérard story come to this article, find that we have omitted it, and "helpfully" add it. Our goal should be to make it completely clear that the story is far-fetched. There are better sources for the story, which I'll add. Of course, that doesn't make it any more plausible. --Macrakis (talk) 13:40, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Good point. Meters (talk) 18:24, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:French_fries/Archive_6&oldid=1164930487"