Talk:Food and drink Voyage Tips and guide

There is a project to improve articles about Food and drink – see the Food and Drink Expedition page.

Why is there an article on Bavarian cuisine (which is fine, but not all that special) but none on - say - Fast food in North America or Mexican food which are probably the two best known and most eaten cuisines globally, unless "Asian" takeout is in any way authentic or uniform across the globe (which I highly doubt). And yes both are a reason for travel all by themselves. There have been movies about people looking for one specific (generic brand name) restaurant, for crying out loud. And whenever I get half a chance to get something close to decent Mexican food (just not found in either East Germany or small town Nicaragua) I get a year's worth of it ;-) Best wishes Hobbitschuster (talk) 14:19, 23 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Answer: because no one has plunged forward in that direction yet. Please give it a shot! I'd think more complete guides on Thai, Japanese, Chinese and Indian cuisine would be immensely helpful for travelers in those respective countries too. Texugo (talk) 14:34, 23 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

I created an article on fast food, but I am not happy with it as of now and my knowledge of the subject is far from encyclopedic... maybe someone from the states would care to help? Hobbitschuster (talk) 15:11, 23 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

I created a new alternative banner for this article (I initially created it first and foremost so that it would be used at the top of the parallel article in the Hebrew edition of Wikivoyage, yet I later decided to also suggest that the English Wikivoyage community would consider using it here as well). So, which banner do you prefer having at the top of this article? ויקיג'אנקי (talk) 04:37, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

The alternative banner is clearly better than the currently-used one. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:49, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

I concur Hobbitschuster (talk) 11:09, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Go for it. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:54, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Agree. #2. – Hshook (talk) 13:58, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

I agree, #2 is an improvement. Danapit (talk) 18:38, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Yep, this really is an improvement. I prefer the new one too. JuliasTravels (talk) 20:52, 23 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

#2 Syced (talk) 10:33, 25 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Agree. /Yvwv (talk) 16:57, 25 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

#2 is better. Kaldari (talk) 00:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Maybe it is my high definition screen, but the new (as of 2015) banner is really blurry. Can we change? Andrewssi2 (talk) 23:43, 16 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

We could switch out this banner with the Japanese cuisine banner. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 23:19, 5 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

moved to Wikivoyage talk:Food and Drink Expedition

Swept in from the pub

Most of our articles about national or regional cuisines use the word "cuisine" in their title like Japanese cuisine and French cuisine but some use the word "food" like Mexican food. Firstly, should we be consistent and adopt one word and if so, which word should we use?

From the small amount of research I did, my gut feel is to use the "food". I used WordTracker to look at four search terms and their usage globally in the last month across all major search engines.

Volume is the number of times this phrased was searched exactly. IAAT is the count of webpages on which the search term appears. Comp is how much competition there is for the keyword (how many websites are trying to get a slice of the SEO pie) and KEI is Key Effectiveness Index, a combination of how popular a word is and the level of competition (more popular increase the number while more competition reduces it). Essentially we should using words that are high KEI.

In this case, there are many people typing Chinese food in Google but there aren't as many websites using that phrase compared to Chinese cuisine. I think this is people usually type common easy words, not technical terms. Wikipedia uses cuisine which makes sense because encyclopedias use formal words but we should have the traveller in mind.

Also I was looking at the site rankings of some of our competitors like Lonely Planet, DK Eyewitness Travel, Rough Guides with Alexa and similar sites, and I noticed that Rough Guides gets a significant percentage of their traffic from the phrase "Vietnamese food". I suspected that not many people would write cuisine. Gizza ^(roam) 09:12, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Huh. I think I actually use these words to mean different things. Chinese and Mexican "food" are what you (don't) get in major Western countries (i.e., the stuff described in Mexican food#International versions, and Chinese and Mexican "cuisine" are what you get when you're in China and Mexico, respectively. I wonder if anyone else uses these phrases the same way that I do.

Also, I wonder whether you'd get the same results if you compare "French food" vs "French cuisine". WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I would settle for food. It is shorter, more straightforward, and better understood by learners of English (with the exception of French). /Yvwv (talk) 21:49, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure those articles were attempted with the same intention or outset. And I agree that XYZ "food" and XYZ "cuisine" are not necessarily always the same thing. Hobbitschuster (talk) 21:58, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

@WhatamIdoing: I would definitely not draw that distinction. If I get Chinese/Mexican food that just means that I got an individual dish or meal. But Chinese/Mexican cuisine is the tradition of food from those places. Contextually "x food can also mean the latter. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:52, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Not sure why, but to me "food" conjures an image of something basic and gourmand (like "fast food") and cuisine something more pretentious and elaborate (like « haute cuisine »)? K7L (talk) 03:29, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Because of the inherent 'prestige' of the French word 'cuisine', versus the English words 'cooking' or 'food'. I don't think there's a difference, except the perceptions people have of the food from certain countries, hence Japanese and French "cuisine", but Mexican "food". --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 04:53, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate there is some desire to tighten things up around here (see the epic struggle around airline redirects) but seriously how is this going to improve the WV travel guide? I'm going to mark myself down as doubtful that changing some words will impact our SEO in any significant way. Andrewssi2 (talk) 02:15, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

American food could be McDonald's. American cuisine is either good home cooking or the stuff you get at good diners, barbecues, "new American" or "classic American" restaurants, etc. I would suggest using "cuisine" exclusively, except for articles about fast food and "casual dining" chain restaurants. "French food" sounds very lowest-common-denominator. "French cuisine" sounds excellent. Let's go for excellence, please. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:46, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

All but one of those articles has "cuisine" in the title. Some talk a great deal about cuisine in the body of the article. For those that are about cuisine, why not keep that in the title and make a redirect from the term containing "food". Then they will be found by either search term. In fact, the Mexican food article refers to "cuisine" more than "food", so if consistency was desired, that would be the article title to change. Nurg (talk) 09:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I second everything you say 100%. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:25, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I think as wikivoyage we should on occasion embrace our inner frenchiness, even though or maybe because of the times we live in are ones where "coastal elites" are openly mocked. In a bit more seriousness though, Mexican food (which I originally intended as a counterpart to fast food in North America when the latter was still called that, should probably be moved to Mexican cuisine Hobbitschuster (talk) 12:25, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I have moved the article accordingly: It is now indeed the Mexican cuisine article. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:16, 12 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Having tried in 15 minutes to digest all these "Talk" entries, wonder if articles focused just on food/cuisine/dining/whatever could benefit from a well-considered template? Looked at currently approved templates for articles and didn't see one. Example: Since food is a topic dear to me, and with wife not inclined to be adventurous, would appreciate coverage of safety. Surely the above contributors and others have more suggestions. Regards, Hennejohn (talk) 21:03, 12 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Might be a good idea. Would you like to create a mockup of a template in your sandbox and link it here for discussion? Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:14, 12 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

Which use of "dinner" is preferred in articles?

• don't use it at all: breakfast, lunch, and supper (the least confusing option, in my opinion)
• use it in place of "supper", as in the UK: breakfast, lunch, and dinner
• use it in place of "lunch", as in the US: breakfast, dinner, and supper

--Robkelk (talk) 16:01, 5 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry? No one in the U.S. calls lunch "dinner", and "supper" is a somewhat archaic regional synonym for the evening meal. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:08, 5 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

So, not lunch, then. --Robkelk (talk) 19:12, 5 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

"Dinner" in the US is theoretically the main/largest meal of the day, which, assuming that you were on a farm and that you were living before World War I, was the middle of the day. The largest meal is now generally the evening meal, except for holidays (dinner on Thanksgiving Day might start as early as noon) and on Sundays for those (mostly elderly people) who want a fancy meal after church services are over, so a dinner invitation from anyone under the age of 75 is understood to be in the evening unless otherwise specified.

"Supper" is theoretically smaller than dinner (i.e., your last list is technically correct, but not a pattern Americans use much any longer), with possibly the most delightful version being breakfast in bed at 8:00 a.m., dinner at 1:00 p.m., afternoon tea at 4:00 p.m., the opera at 8:00 p.m., and supper at 11:00 p.m. (This schedule assumes that you don't have reservations at the Grand Tier Restaurant at the Met, and thus won't be eating your main course before the curtain rises and your dessert during intermission.)

As to how they are used: "dinner" and "supper" are generally considered synonyms. "Dinner" feels fancier, and it is the term that most upscale restaurants seem to prefer. "Supper" is unambiguous about the time of day. If you're writing paragraphs, then occasionally substituting the phrase evening meal would bypass the problem. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:06, 5 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

I believe supper and dinner are used interchangeably depending on the region in the US. Perhaps it's my region, but when I was growing up dinner had fancier connotations and was eaten later in the evening (6-8pm) compared to a supper (5-6 pm). Today I rarely hear or use supper. I also don't notice the usage of either relating to the time one eats beyond it being eaten after 5pm. DethDestroyerOfWords (talk) 20:13, 5 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

British & Irish usage has evolved in a similar way. Scottish hospitable greeting: "Eh, but ye'll have had your tea??" Grahamsands (talk) 20:43, 6 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

In Singapore, we say "breakfast", "lunch" and "dinner", while "supper" refers to a very late night meal that is eaten after dinner (~9pm or later), and is often not eaten at all. And at least in the parts of Australia and the U.S. that I have lived in, it's also "breakfast", "lunch" and "dinner". But that said, when read Enid Blyton books as a kid, they used "breakfast", "dinner" and "supper", and Enid Blyton was most certainly a British author, so I'm not sure if that usage is a British regionalism, or is it standard British English? The dog2 (talk) 05:11, 7 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Having "dinner" refer to the largest meal of the day is too confusing since for nutritional/health reasons, breakfast should be the largest meal of the day! Just use "dinner" for the evening meal, that will be understood by most people. ArticCynda (talk) 07:30, 7 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

(indent) "Dinner" to me is the third meal of the day regardless of how much or little you eat. The way I tend to hear "supper" used in the US is strictly for use when dinner is prepared at home. I've never heard of anyone "going out for supper". ChubbyWimbus (talk) 08:46, 7 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

I do not forget second breakfast and afternoon tea!--Traveler100 (talk) 14:00, 7 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

...and brunch. K7L (talk) 18:20, 7 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

And elevenses!

Artic, I believe that having the main meal in the middle of the day was established for the convenience of the cook, in centuries when under-nutrition was the main food-related health concern. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:27, 7 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Seems reasonable yes, I can imagine it wasn't very pleasant to prepare a main meal under candle light in winter when days are short, so convenience for the cook probably played a role there. ArticCynda (talk) 08:41, 9 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

Which section - 'Eat' or 'Drink' - is most appropriate for places which specialise in afternoon tea? There are of course many hotels which serve afternoon tea, and their place in an article is clear, but there are also tearooms which aren't attached to a restaurant or hotel.

For those who don't know, tea is a meal inasmuch as a lot of food (i.e. more than a snack amount, and potentially enough to stuff yourself depending on how greedy and/or rich you're feeling) is typically consumed, but the main focus is a pot of tea (the drink), and there will always be a lot of blends to choose from. The food, while significant in quantity and served on a platter or one of those tiered stacks, is made up of things which by themselves are just light bites: cakes, scones, small sandwiches, toasted buns, fruit etc. Some upmarket places - like this example - offer a glass of champagne with the tea. Places like the example typically don't serve full cooked meals at other times of the day; tea is all they do, all day every day.

So I'm wondering which section of an article they belong in? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:18, 21 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

It's a judgment call, based on your determination of whether the tea or the food is more important. Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I guess so. It's just...thinking for myself...so hard :P --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 18:03, 21 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

It was my understanding that the drink section was geared more towards nightlife (bars, clubs, etc.) HOWEVER: In the manual of style [1] it also lists things like bar & grills and tea/coffee houses with a note beside saying those could go into an eat listing as well. So no matter what you do, it won't be "wrong" and you can plunge boldly. DethDestroyerOfWords (talk) 21:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I would put a complete afternoon tea in "eat", as I would regard it as a replacement for lunch. If I couldn't find any pubs to go in drink, then a tearoom where a pot of tea with one scone was usual would go in "drink". AlasdairW (talk) 21:51, 21 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your perspectives. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:42, 22 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I'd say the same thing as Ikan; if you usually go there to have a cup of tea and occasionally some snacks or a sandwich, then it's certainly a Drink listing. If people in general go there to have a meal, then it's an Eat. If really unsure, I put the listing in Eat. ϒpsilon (talk) 12:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I'd be inclined to stick "afternoon tea" in the British sense (an afternoon meal break where tea is served with food) in "eat" as the "eat" and "drink" categories were originally intended to be analogous to the "restaurants" and "nightlife" sections of other travel guides. My guess is that the meaning of words shift because you are speaking English instead of whatever Americanised rubbish we're speaking here in the colonies; here "tea" means literally the beverage, but English usage has it as a meal break, pushing it into "eat" with the food listings. K7L (talk) 16:59, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for all the opinions; putting it under 'Eat' is what I've done. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:17, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Where can I stick it? There are two Buena Park#See listings for "dinner theatre" which look to be in the wrong section; dinner should be "eat" and theatre should be "do" as an activity, but "dinner theatre" isn't listed on WYCSI at all. Would it be reasonable for me to cite the placement of "comedy club" in "drink" (as nightlife) as a basis to add "dinner theatre" to WYCSI as "eat" with the rest of the restaurant listings? K7L (talk) 16:51, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Putting it under 'Eat' makes sense, but I guess it kind of depends how big a deal the theatre/dinner aspects of it are. If the plays are eligible for industry awards, or widely recognised for the brilliant performances, a dinner theatre could arguably go in 'Do', whereas if people go for the food primarily then it's certainly an 'Eat'. Although I have no experience of this as there's only one such venue in the whole of the UK, it presumably depends on which between eating and theatre is the biggest draw.

For tea, I ended up creating a new section under the 'Eat' heading. For places where there are several dinner theatres around, that might be something which could be done.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:19, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Personally, I'd stick this under "Eat" (maybe in a separate subsection), but there's a solid argument in favor of "Do". -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:23, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I've updated Buena Park#Eat and Wikivoyage:Where you can stick it accordingly. K7L (talk) 19:42, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Incidentally, I disagree with comedy clubs belonging in "Drink". Stand-up comedy is a form of nightlife only secondarily at best; at its heart, it's a performance along similar lines as live music. If concert halls belong in "Do", so do comedy clubs. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 20:09, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I recall raising the same issue in 2013. K7L (talk) 22:25, 23 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia:Dinner theater says "Sometimes the play is incidental entertainment, secondary to the meal, in the style of a night club, or the play may be the main feature of the evening, with dinner less important or, in some cases, optional." Medieval Times Tournament and Dinner Show (one at Buena Park) has a cast of about 75 actors and 20 horses that perform in a large arena. Pirates Dinner Adventure (the other at Buena Park) also looks to have a large cast and large set (a galleon). It looks like the main feature would be the shows, rather than the dinner. I say "Do". Nurg (talk) 08:27, 24 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I would usually put dinner theatre in "Do", as I did a few months ago in the Greensboro article. I think of dinner theatre as much more than just a meal, and I would expect to see it listed with other performances and activities rather than with ordinary restaurants. But in cases where the show is less important and the meal is the main draw, I can see putting them in "Eat". Glancing at the websites for the Buena Park listings, I agree with Nurg's impression that these two seem like they fit better in "Do". —Granger (talk · contribs) 09:46, 24 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough. I've moved them to Buena Park#Do as there wasn't much there except for the one large amusement park. K7L (talk) 16:33, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

I have created an alternative banner for this article. See:

Go to the edit history of this article and you can see how the alternative looked (I added it for a while on Feb. 14). But for now, we can vote here. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 22:42, 14 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

The alternative would be better placed at Fruits and vegetables, though I like that article's current banner better for the topic. For this article, I'd support keeping the current banner for now, because it shows both food and drink (the teapot), though in the future, it would be nice to use a sharper photo (as the alternate banner is). Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:42, 15 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Agree. /Yvwv (talk) 15:23, 15 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

See Talk:Fruits and vegetables. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 03:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

No drinks, I know, but shows a variety of kinds of food. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 04:19, 1 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Original. The proposed replacement is overexposed and not as interesting, either. Other than that, I think it's the greatest! :-) Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:30, 1 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

True. I'll keep looking in future for a banner that would work. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 23:51, 1 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Excellent. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:32, 2 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Here's another thought, though I wasn't thrilled with the result. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 16:03, 2 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

I think it's quite good, though the fact that it doesn't include any drinks gives me pause. But it's a very good photo, IMO, and much sharper than the current banner. I'd like to see some other input on it, but I would not oppose a substitution, although I'm not impelled to support it, either. Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Although the image quality of this one is better, I think the action shot showing a meal is better than some cold cuts on a tray. Others may disagree. I support the effort to come up with a better banner for this article, I just don't think this one is there yet. —Granger (talk · contribs) 09:11, 6 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Agree, something from a restaurant would be nice if we can find one. But if not, this is certainly an improvement. --Bigpeteb (talk) 17:24, 6 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Doesn't that express the opposite sentiment to that which guides most travellers' eating ventures? At home, we should maintain a healthy lifestyle, a balanced diet etc ("eating to live"), but when travelling, if you're not tucking into the local cuisine with gusto and trying new things ("living to eat"), then I'd suggest there's something wrong with you. Can we find a better quotation about the joy of discovering food when travelling? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:06, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Oh well, I can't resist aiming a boulder on current Brazilian president, who proudly tweets photos of himself cooking instant noodles on his room every time he goes abroad. As for myself, if I could afford it, would every month spend two weekends in Belém and the other two in Lisbon just to indulge in eating pleasures. "Every person inside his/hers own square", as says the chorus of a 2005 Brazilian radio hit. Ibaman (talk) 13:28, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

That halfwit does know instant noodles are foreign, right? ;-) --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 14:22, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

I agree, that does convey exactly the opposite of what we want on this article. Finding a better replacement is tough, though. Here are a couple I found, but I'm not in love with any of them:

• The gentle art of gastronomy is a friendly one. It hurdles the language barrier, makes friends among civilized people, and warms the heart. --Samuel Chamberlain
• One cannot think well, love well, sleep well, if one has not dined well. --Virginia Woolf
• If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. --J.R.R. Tolkien
• There is no love sincerer than the love of food. --George Bernard Shaw
• Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food. --Hippocrates
• Your body is not a temple, it's an amusement park. Enjoy the ride. --Anthony Bourdain

I quite like this one, but it probably belongs better on Alcohol than here:

• Drink heavily with locals whenever possible. --Anthony Bourdain

--Bigpeteb (talk) 19:04, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

I like these quotes. I think the best ones are the quotes by Virginia Woolf, George Bernard Shaw, and Hippocrates (with the quote by Virginia Woolf being the best suited here). --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:11, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

(edit conflict)Thanks for doing that :) I like a few of those, including the alcohol one - I'll go ahead and add it right away, if there's a place for it. Among the foodie ones, Chamberlain, Woolf, and Shaw stand out. Chamberlain is the most apt for travel, though the other two benefit from being less wordy.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:12, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Maybe the "eat to live, not live to eat" quote more has to do with the fact that you shouldn't eat more than your body can use or else you'll end up obese. That said, any of the above would be a better quote to have on top of the article (if there has to be a quote there). --Ypsilon (talk) 19:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

That's exactly what it means, but if you can't treat yourself when on holiday, when can you?--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 19:21, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

I think it's good to include a quote at the beginning of the article because it sets a good tone. Quotes are somewhat casual but not too casual, which matches well with the tone of this website in general. It also helps to engage the reader in the topic of the upcoming article. Therefore, I would support changing the quote rather than removing the existing one. --Comment by Selfie City (talk | contributions) 19:25, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

I totally agree that the current page quote is the opposite of what we want on this page and should be replaced. Thank you, ThunderingTyphoons! for bringing it up Bigpeteb for finding other quotes. I love the Hippocrates quote, but I think the most travel-appropriate quotes above are the Chamberlain and the Tolkien, though the Tolkien is a bit preachy (however, I certainly agree with the message). The Woolf is a great quote, too, but overall, the Chamberlain is my favorite for this page. I commented on the "drink heavily" quote at Talk:Alcoholic beverages. Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:13, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

I also think the most travel-relevant one is Chamberlain, though I like the Tolkein and Woolf ones as well. —Granger (talk · contribs) 03:30, 27 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

There was consensus to change, so I've changed. I picked Woolf, because the most people (4) said they liked it. The runner up with 3 was Chamberlain.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 13:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

So says the Food and drink#Manners section. I changed the clause by adding "outside Europe", because every country I've been to in Europe eats in the European way. But out of curiosity, I'd like to repeat the question I wrote in my edit summary; where in the world do people eat in the American way? It is a genuine question, as I haven't travelled much outside Europe. ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 07:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

@ThunderingTyphoons!, I'm curious about this "cut all food on the plate" bit. Where, exactly, does the rest of the world cut their food? In the kitchen? WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:03, 29 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think the key point is "eat with the fork in the right hand". This suggests cutting up all the food on the plate, before eating any of it and moving the fork from the left hand to the right hand between the cutting and eating stages. This is distinct from the approach of cutting one piece off and then eating it before cutting any more. (In some countries it is common to do all the cutting in the kitchen, and then eat using chopsticks.) AlasdairW (talk) 22:18, 29 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

In proper American table manners, one does not cut all the food before eating. That is only done for people who can feed themselves but cannot be trusted with knives (e.g., toddlers).

The proper handling for knives and forks in the US is the very old European style: With the fork in the left hand and knife in the right hand, cut one bit of food. Put the knife down on the plate and switch the fork to the right hand to scoop up the food (on the curved inward side, as if with a spoon, not on the back of the fork; also, not stabbing the food). Then you switch the fork back to your left hand and pick the up knife with your right hand to repeat the process.

I suspect the person who invented this was extremely right handed. As a person who is somewhere between left-handed and ambidextrous and also has arthritis, it is not the model I personally use. But it is the correct version. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:00, 30 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you. (By the way, I'm right-handed, but as a flutist, I use my left hand a lot, too, and I found the European method of keeping the knife in the left hand and the fork in the right hand more efficient, so I use it the great majority of the time.) Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:09, 30 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I always thought standard European table manners dictates that it should be fork in left and knife in right, and American table manners are pretty much the same in formal settings. To my knowledge, Americans just tend to be more casual, so while in Europe, you need to peel off a small piece of bread, then spread the butter on the small piece before putting the entire piece in your mouth, Americans are generally OK if you spread the butter on the entire slice of bread, then start biting each piece off. The dog2 (talk) 02:31, 1 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Maybe some Americans, particularly some of those who've traveled to Europe, have adopted European conventions like I have, but WhatamIdoing is correct. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:21, 1 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

The correct way to eat a piece of bread (e.g., a bread roll) in US manners is to use your fingers to break off a piece equal to two bites, butter that, and eat it in two bites. By contrast, in France, you break off a piece that is a suitable size for one bite, and there is no butter.

This rule assumes, however, that we're talking about an ordinary yeast-based dinner roll or a slice of something like a baguette. The rules are different for things like baking powder biscuits (butter while hot) and cornbread (butter while hot, and eat with a fork). WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:31, 1 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

The current banner for this article is very blurry at full view, and this talk page shows other people bringing up the issue too. I've mocked up a new one -- thoughts? Vaticidalprophet (talk) 17:12, 17 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, but the proposed replacement isn't much less blurry and is less interesting and doesn't show anyone eating. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:26, 17 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Swept in from the pub

Some articles or sections on food don't include any advice for vegetarians, such as Spanish cuisine, Russia, and Brazil. This would reduce discouragement from vegetarian travel to these countries since they don't have any specialized advice. The template should look like:

This article or section does not provide advice for vegetarians. You can add advice for vegetarians based on personal experience, or by using information from the corresponding article on Wikipedia.

Categories: Articles needing advice for vegetarians

Faster than Thunder (talk) 00:16, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I don't see how adding more tags will help for what would otherwise be a niche problem. //shb (t | c | m) 00:27, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

experience in Wikivoyage has been that these sort of templates tend not to achieve very much of anything, except to add clutter to an article. Wikivoyage doesn't have the large contributor base of Wikipedia, unfortunately, where a template like this would be so effective way of addressing gaps in coverage. Any contributions you could make by adding listings for vegetarian restaurants would be very welcome, and would achieve much more than a template noting that we don't have such listings. Ground Zero (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

This template would make it easier to find others interested in such improvements, even among the sheer contributor base of Wikivoyage. This would be more effective if categorization is attached to the template. Faster than Thunder (talk) 03:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

And past style tags that do exactly as you propose have proven to not work as you suggest on this site before. //shb (t | c | m) 03:50, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

This template could be added to almost every Wikivoyage article. We have a way to find others interested in making a type of improvements: create a Wikivoyage:Expeditions. Adding templates is not how you find others interested in such improvements. Ground Zero (talk) 03:52, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I'm your target audience, as someone who hesitates to add vegetarian-specific content because I consider my dietary preferences to be niche.

I agree that this template is not worth the visual clutter. I wonder if there's instead a way to leverage the Travel as a vegetarian article, both to highlight the cuisine articles with useful content, and to somehow call attention to articles that are missing the opportunity? Gerode (talk) 04:12, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Gerode, that's a good idea, but it's also helpful to have information in the more specific articles. I'd rather have both/and instead of either/or.

IMO it would be nice to have a little bit of information for a variety of "niche" diets. That could include vegetarian, vegan, gluten-free, low-carb, diabetic, etc. Perhaps if it feels weird to add a paragraph about vegetarian food, it'd feel less weird if you add a couple of lines about another dietary pattern. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:16, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Gerode: I see nothing at all wrong with adding information about restricted diets in destination articles. We provide information for women travellers, people with disabilities, LGBT people, why not vegetarians and other restricted diets? It would only be an improvement yo our travel guide. Ground Zero (talk) 11:06, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I couldn't agree more with this. And the point isn't whether vegetarianism is mainstream in most Western countries - it is - but that information useful to vegetarians is good to include, and for that matter can often be useful for non-vegetarians who want to eat more vegetables, too. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:08, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

…Or want to experience a different kind of meal – as good a variation as going to the Nepalese or Georgian restaurant, if the vegetarian restaurant is good. Also in mainstream restaurants, the vegetarian options can be as good as the non-vegetarian ones in their price range. At cafeterias, the vegan/vegetarian options are on occasion more tempting than the non-vegetarian dishes of the day. –LPfi (talk) 15:25, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

@WhatamIdoing, Gerode, Ground Zero: Maybe this won't be as nearly as bad of an idea as when I first thought of it a while ago, but is there any interest in creating an expedition specifically for improving everything related to food and drink on this site (more than just vegetarianism)? I'd be down for it if there's general interest. //shb (t | c | m) 05:42, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I didn't say vegetarianism is niche, I said the way I like to eat is niche 😛 Enough so that I don't find individual Eat listings to be useful for me personally for most destinations, even ones with high-quality articles. I need to ponder what a delightful-for-me wiki-based food and drink experience would look like. (And in the meantime, be bolder about adding places near my home that I like!) Gerode (talk) 18:00, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

SHB, I don't know what tends to result in a successful expedition. If we decide to create one, then maybe a note at w:en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink would find some new contributors. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:26, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Good idea – and would be a great way to get some contributors over from Wikipedia. //shb (t | c | m) 22:42, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Faster than Thunder: Whatever said by Ground Zero and SHB2000 are unfortunately true. Wikivoyage does not have the workforce equivalent to Wikipedia (although the English version is way more active than some Indian-language versions), and that's why I discourage users adding such templates. I remember adding a {{movetodistrict}} template at the Drink section of Kolkata years ago, but I moved those listings to districts only recently. If the vegetarian issue seems pressing, I suggest starting a discussion at the talk page of the affected article. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 04:01, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Really, the best solution is just to add vegetarian listings yourself when you see that they are lacking. Even if you don't know the city in question yourself, it's better than nothing to look up eateries in any halfway reliable source you have and put descriptions in your own words. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:30, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Though in the case of cuisine articles, bringing up a lack of vegetable dishes on the talk page could be appropriate. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:31, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I definitely agree and is a very good point you bring up regarding cuisine articles. //shb (t | c | m) 04:36, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Templates requesting editor action are only useful if it is a five minute task which can be done without knowing the article subject. For example crop when a banner is the wrong dimensions, or Dead link. In the case of Spanish cuisine, the template would not be useful as the corresponding Wikipeda article doesn't have a vegetarian or vegan section. If you can find some information on vegetarian dishes in restaurants in Spain, it would be better to start a section with the limited info that you have (and even if you check many menus and find no vegetarian dishes then saying the options are poor is a start). AlasdairW (talk) 12:29, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Vegetarian is certainly not niche, in developed western countries it's a mainstream offering in most outlets, so much that I wouldn't even mention it in a listing. Any half-competent chef can serve veggies on request, especially with cuisines where meat is an add-on rather than the basis. East Europe is evolving fast as they see what westerner visitors expect. Any attempt to specially flag such places will sink under the clutter of flags. Vegan and GF are rapidly expanding from a lower starting point so I'd always mention this if either the restaurant website or customer reviews did so, but give it a few more years, that might no longer be necessary. Grahamsands (talk) 13:09, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Any Western half-competent chef can serve veggies, but whether they can fix a culinary experience with what they have at hand is not as sure. If I have vegan guests, or even vegetarian ones, here in Turku (200,000 inhabitants), the restaurants where I'd take them for a nicer lunch or dinner can be counted on one hand's fingers. In other restaurants the vegetarian options are not among the flagship ones. Off the beaten path the vegetarian options may be quite mediocre, and you can find the odd place where there is no vegetarian choice at all ("a hamburger without the beef, please").

Ergo, for Western countries like Finland, I would still try to list vegetarian restaurants in any city article, and describe the general situation in the country article (Travel as a vegetarian#In the West shows that such summaries are needed).

–LPfi (talk) 15:14, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

The "cuisine" articles linked seem to be about introducing people to a specific kind of national or ethnic cuisine (Spanish cuisine, Russian cuisine, etc) as an overview (without restaurants), so I'm not sure those are the proper articles for this information since the vegetarian options may lie outside of the traditional cuisine, but the country articles should definitely say something about it. And restaurant listings can obviously say if a place is vegetarian/vegan or if it has enough variety of options to make it worth noting. But it's really up to editors to add that information if they are aware. I agree with others that it's too niche to be worth having its own box demanding special focus from editors. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 15:41, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Still, they may be watched by people who are knowledgable of the cuisine scene in the related region, so their talk page may be a good venue for a discussion. Also, most cuisines have some mainly vegetarian dishes, which could be made vegetarian by minor tweaks. I think a Cope section, like Finnish cuisine#Dietary restrictions would suit most cuisine articles. Often the cuisine is found in a region sharing other features, such that specific other options (such as going to a Buddhist restaurant) may be relevant. One can also point out in passing that a dish may be a good option for those with certain diets, or issues with a seemingly suitable dish (such as fish sauce in Vietnam). I agree that the country articles should say something about these issues (also about halal/kosher and other common diets). –LPfi (talk) 08:01, 23 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi everyone,

I'm proposing making a section on travel-friendly snacks. I have some resources about the following:

• Road trip snacks
• Healthy camping & hiking snacks
• Healthy bicycle ride snacks
• Healthy snacks for going running
• Healthy snacks for children
• Healthy snacks for adults

And here are the references for those:

• 5 Car-Friendly Snacks for the Ultimate Road Trip | America’s Test Kitchen. (n.d.). Retrieved June 16, 2025, from https://www.americastestkitchen.com/articles/1132-8-adult-and-kid-approved-car-snacks-for-the-ultimate-road-trip
• 5 Food Tips for Camping and Hiking. (n.d.). Retrieved June 16, 2025, from https://www.eatright.org/food/planning/away-from-home/5-food-tips-for-camping-and-hiking
• 5 Snacks for Your Bike Ride. (2022, October 6). https://web.archive.org/web/20221006234211/https://www.eatright.org/fitness/exercise/exercise-nutrition/5-snacks-for-your-bike-ride
• Snacks and sweetened drinks - children: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia. (n.d.). Retrieved June 16, 2025, from https://medlineplus.gov/ency/patientinstructions/000351.htm
• Snacks for adults: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia. (n.d.). Retrieved June 16, 2025, from https://medlineplus.gov/ency/patientinstructions/000338.htm
• Top Snacks for Runners. (n.d.). Retrieved June 16, 2025, from https://www.eatright.org/fitness/physical-activity/exercise-nutrition/top-snacks-for-runners

What are your thoughts?

--OpenBarry (talk) 17:59, 16 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

First, new sections go at the end of talk pages. This is not a regular article but a category article that has links to regular articles. Maybe you need to create a new article. Please read Wikivoyage:External links first, though, and check whether these snacks are covered in any of the articles linked in this article or in articles about hiking. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 17 June 2025 (UTC)Reply

We already have Camping food. Are you sure we need another article of the type you're suggesting? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:44, 17 June 2025 (UTC)Reply