Hot chocolate was one of the Agriculture, food and drink good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 February 2019 and 13 March 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wikigirl 0690.
Is it really necessary to list the French translation, "chocolat chaud" in the first line? It's not another name for the subject, it is simply the subject's name in another language. I think it is not appropriate here. 153.31.113.20 (talk) 18:34, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Hot chocolate (also known as hot cocoa or just cocoa or chocolat milk) is a heated beverage typically consisting of shaved chocolate, melted chocolate or cocoa powder, heated milk or water, and sugar. Drinking chocolate is similar to hot chocolate, but is made from melted chocolate shavings or paste rather than a powdered mix that's soluble in water.[1]"
This doesn't really make sense. It states that hot chocolate can consist of "shaved chocolate" then says it's distinct. Which is correct? 94.14.191.115 (talk) 13:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
can we find a better image? that image has so much whipped cream in it, you can't exactly tell that it is hot chocolate. Kingturtle 03:37, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I have uploaded an image called Image:White hot chocolate.JPG that I think may be good to have under Place in modern society. If anyone thinks its relivent? The recipe for it is at here.--Hapenstance14:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why are marshmallows placed into hot chocolates sometimes? I find that it makes no difference to the taste, and the only evidence that is was there is a white layer of liquid on top of the drink. Also, is the marshmallow supposed to melt so quickly? If so, why? Hugh Jass03:31, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It may not change the taste of the actual hot chocolate, but I for one like the marshmallows themselves when they're all gooey from being partially melted. Kinda like the cherry on top of an ice-cream sundae. It doesn't change the flavor of the ice-cream (except maybe for the tiny bit it touched), but it's yummy when you pluck it off and eat it! --Icarus05:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So could we have something on the history of adding marshmallows to hot chocolate? Because, to be honest, I'd never even heard of it until I read Calvin and Hobbes comics. I mean, why is it so common in America whereas the very idea, here in Europe, is strange? Crazy Eddy20:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it could have something to do with the marketing of marshmallows here, and hot chocolate in its quick powdered form. There's an AI Summary that claims that "The combination of marshmallows and hot chocolate became popular in the early 20th century. Janet Hill, the founder of the Boston Cooking School Magazine, wrote a recipe booklet in 1917 for the Angelus Marshmallows company to popularize new uses for marshmallows. The booklet is credited with pioneering the use of marshmallows on hot chocolate." So, it would have had to do with finding new commercial uses for marshmallows (which are not the original marsh mallow type, but the sugar-fluffs that we have today). Meerkat77 (talk) 20:27, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not, one site a found listed 8 mg of caffeine in a cup of hot chocolate made from powdered mix (and a chocolate bar at 30 mg). A regular cup of coffee contains about 100 mg or the same amount as a caffeine pill. Rmhermen18:12, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually Swiss Miss (a popular brand in the US) makes a hot chocolate with as much caffeine as a cup of coffee. Note this is a special type of hot chocolate, and typically hot chocolate does not contain that level of caffeine 184.60.10.67 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Def not, however if you want to make a cup of coffee into hot chocalyte just mix a few tablespoons of canned pure holland chocalyate at your nearest market with simple coffee, not only will it taste better than every hot chocalyte brand out, but it will be a simple way of saying 'hey i'm better than you', because you wouldnt be using marshmellows with renett or even whey and other 'natural' ingredients added to the powder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.25.193 (talk) 05:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In this article it is stated that some may make the distinction between whether the drink is instant (cocoa) or made from bar chocolate (hot chocolate). I wanted to know how verifiable this is, especially because different places have different names for things. I have always understood that hot chocolate is made from water (and thus includes all "instant" varieties as well as the original European version which was made with water) while hot cocoa is made with milk. Curious to know if others agree with changing the statements made in the article to be more general. strideranne19:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Even if some do make your distinction, that doesn't mean that others don't make the distinction already noted in the article, which seems far more common. Note packages of instant "hot cocoa" and quotes like this "In the '50s, they added sugar and cocoa to their dry mixes and developed one of the first full-flavored dry cocoa mixes. Swiss Miss..." from the ConAgra site. Rmhermen14:55, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On the page you mention, Swiss Miss is self described as "America's preferred brand of hot chocolate." The description you have included is one that refers to the addition of actual cocoa powder and does not refer to the actual product. While doing Google searches on various combinations of keywords, these were my results. Hot Cocoa - lots of homemade recipes using cocoa or bar chocolate. Hot Chocolate - much more varied but I noticed more commercial brands mentioned, as well as Mexican hot chocolate which I think is closer to the original recipe. I also looked at labels of a bunch of different commercial brands, most are advertised as hot chocolate. Also wondering if the phenomenon is regional, I'm from NY but now live in Montreal, so maybe it is an East Coast thing. strideranne19:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A quick look at the ingredients list on containers of 'cocoa', 'drinking chocolate' and 'hot chocolate drink' of various UK brands reveals that 'cocoa' is always 100% cocoa powder (or 97% plus acidity regulator), while drinking chocolate (both Cadbury's and Tesco's) is only 25% cocoa powder (and the rest mostly sugar). Hot chocolate drink, on the other hand, seems to be mostly made from chocolate or from a mixture of chocolate and cocoa powder. (I'm guessing that drinking chocolate was originally considered 'hot chocolate' only after it was made up. After all, Tetley don't sell their teabags as 'hot tea'.) I would conclude that cocoa (the drink) and hot chocolate are different things.Grant (talk) 13:30, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, maybe Cocoa (the drink) be a Hot Chocolate's before-version, in fact, many things we know are "final versions" of early stuff, maybe this is one of the times, which makes sense considering that it gave rise to Chocolate –which in turn gave rise to Hot Chocolate (See: WP: Chocolate).
Cadbury's Drinking Chocolate is probably the best known brand of hot chocolate, and as a result some people refer to hot chocolate as "drinking chocolate".
...because it mentions two facts that are unsubstantiated and, in the latter case, quite dubious. It's likely the other way around, unless a cited source shows otherwise. CGameProgrammer18:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good call. "Drinking chocolate", as far as I know, is an Italian thing not a Cadbury's thing, and is significantly different from what most people call "hot chocolate". — Saxifrage✎00:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Drinking Chocolate" is without a doubt a Cadbury's thing, regardless of any Italian connection. The brand has been around for a very long time. But the edit is probably for the best, because it's certainly true that there's no proof of origin for the phrase, and it's clearly not just used by Cadbury's. On the other hand, simply editing out "drinking chocolate" altogether is not a great fix, because currently the article doesn't make any reference to "drinking chocolate". That was my aim in adding it in the first place. Perhaps it should be added to the previous section, where it could be noted as a common synonym for hot chocolate. It seems likely that historically it came about as a way of distinguishing chocolate bars from chocolate drinks, but I haven't been able to find any evidence to confirm this. Thorf14:12, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's the thing, it seems to have different meanings depending on where you are. Obviously, where you are drinking chocolate is a Cadbury's brand name for hot chocolate. Where I come from I've never heard of that stuff, and "drinking chocolate" is a dense, intensely sweet and rich drink that comes in 1 cup doses so that you don't overdo it. Perhaps it means other things elsewhere. If it's going to be reinserted into the article, the fact that it has different meanings in different places is probably the thing to focus on for lack of any fixed definition to focus on. Some citations would be useful for that too. — Saxifrage✎23:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Re-reading the article just now, I see that in fact "drinking chocolate" is mentioned quite a few times. I don't see how I could have missed it, really. In any case, I would definitely be in favour of adding a paragraph about the different meanings for "drinking chocolate". It seems that all three terms (hot chocolate, cocoa, drinking chocolate) have rather different meanings depending on area, and it would be nice to clarify this. Of course, it would have to be a group effort, because I doubt that any one person knows all the variations. Thorf10:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It shouldn't actually be that hard for one or two people. If we have a section with sources for two meanings, we don't need to worry about getting all the rest because people will inevitably add them when they read the article. The trouble will be getting sources for these additions, but that's work that can be done later. :) — Saxifrage✎17:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
According to Brett Moore the difference is that drinking chocolate is made from actual chocolate while hot cocoa is made from cocoa powder. I think someone more resourceful could find additional sources to back this up. I'm ASSUMING Cadbury's "drinking chocolate" is actually hot cocoa. I personally think that if drinking chocolate is something different it should technically have its own page. However, I think the page would probably end up being a stub and thus combined with the hot chocolate page. Bgramkow (talk) 04:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't it common to top the chocolate with some whipped cream? or is it just me? eitherway, the article doesn't mention it. -- Frap09:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like I only get the choice of topping my hot chocolate with whipped cream if I go to a coffee shop. I think it's like a substitute for adding marshmallows. Or maybe it's the other way around? QueenStupid16:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The page says something about the "McDonalds" being the first to use hot chocolate, which is obviously vandalism. A much older page uses the "Olmecs" in its place. I don't actually know if this is truly correct either but I can't fix it anyway because of the semi-protection. Someone who can fix it should. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.145.153.92 (talk • contribs).
In Argentina and Uruguay, what you would call hot chocolate (and in Belgium "warme chocolade" or "chocolat chaud") we call it a "submarine". When you go to a bar or cafe and you ask for a submarine, you get a tall jar or glass of hot milk, and a bar of chocolate that you sink into the milk youself - thus, a submarine (and then steer with a long spoon, and add sugar as you like it). Dunno if in the rest of latin america such concept exists. --200.70.117.2205:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's poor choice to have "HOT" in the name, as it is in fact regulary served both boiling hot and ICE COLD (yes absolutely same drink, just the temperature changes). In fact proper and correct name would be simply "cocoa". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.248.159.240 (talk) 10:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think there should be a section here related to Frozen Hot Chocolate. If not, Frozen Hot Chocolate should be created as a separate page. Serendipity 3 in New York and Santa's Candy Castle in Santa Claus, Indiana, are two of the best-known sellers of this speciality -- but many, many others exist. Frozen Hot Chocolate has become so popular as to warrant inclusion somewhere in Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.49.107.132 (talk) 14:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This sounds like marketing to me. How could something as caffeine-laden as chocolate improve sleep? I think that comment should be removed until it has a proper citation. Venice (talk) 16:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And I would like proper citation that chocolate is "caffine-laden"
I was trying to find an article on cocoa (the traditional bedtime drink) and arrived here. I would just like to say that I have never heard cocoa (the drink) called "hot cocoa", likewise, hot chocolate and drinking chocolate are the same as each other but not the same as cocoa, in the UK at least. DuncanHill (talk) 06:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the terminology may vary even within the UK. To me, cocoa (which I've also never heard called 'hot cocoa') is a drink made from either (1) hot milk, cocoa powder, and sugar, or (2) hot milk and 'drinking chocolate' (which is itself just a mix of cocoa powder and sugar), while hot chocolate is a 'instant' drink made from hot water and hot chocolate powder (which contains milk powder, either chocolate or cocoa and sugar, and potentially other additives). Stephen Morley (talk) 20:26, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article baffles me. Cocoa is made of cocoa -a powder made from chocolate that may or may not be pure chocolate. Instant cocoa is powdered chocolate with sugar added (so one can just add water) and baking cocoa is fine ground chocolate that may or may not be Dutch processed, with no sugar added. 'Hot chocolate' is made from actual chocolate chunks melted in milk, similar to ganache. This distinction is a nit for me because I'm a pastry chef. I'm also strict about 'white confection' because it contains no chocolate liquor, only cocoa butter and should not be referred to as 'white chocolate'.The Red Queen (talk) 16:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, cocoa powder is made from cocoa beans. (Chocolate is made from cocoa – not the other way round.) Products sold as cocoa (for drinking) are pure (or nearly pure) cocoa powder. Drinking chocolate has extra ingredients. As far as I can see (when looking at the cocoa/chocolate drink section of Tesco last night) only those products sold as 'hot chocolate drink' have actual chocolate in them. Grant (talk) 13:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm wondering if the drink made of hot milk and PURE cocoa powder, which you can sweeten with sugar to taste, qualifies as 'hot cocoa'. It seems to be the same as the drink that's just called 'cocoa' in the UK. But what's it called in other English speaking countries? The following sentence seems to imply that 'hot cocoa' is only the instant form of the cocoa drink;
"Hot cocoa is made from a powdered mix of cocoa, sugar and thickeners, without cocoa butter."
BTW, in the Netherlands both the instant form (e.g. Nesquick) and the drink made with pure cocoa powder (e.g. Droste) are called hot/warm chocolate milk (provided that heated milk/water is used). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.10.46.8 (talk) 12:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps it's because I'm a chocoholic, but I was expecting far more from this article. I'm afraid it does not fulfill the Good Article criteria at this time, mainly due to lack of references and the fact that it does not cover all important aspects of the subject matter. Here are my specific concerns for future improvement:
Keep in mind WP:LEAD; the lead section must be a summary of the entire article. White hot chocolate is not mentioned anywhere but in the lead and in the caption of an image.
I've rephrased the sentence mentioning white hot chocolate to include information about the thicker hot chocolate and the thinner hot cocoa. When I expand the article further, I expect to have to add and modify sentences as necessary. Malinaccier (talk)20:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The entire first paragraph in "Origins" has only one reference, which points back to wwww.etymonline.com. What makes this a reliable source?
If you look at the site, it is an online etymology encyclopedia that by browsing around it looks reliable. Also, I split the first paragraph into two and added sources. I'm still looking for further references and information. Malinaccier (talk)20:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I did look at the site and I do not see what makes it reliable. It's not written by an authority on the subject and they don't list their own references; these are definitely red flags that the site may not meet WP:RS. I suggest finding another one to replace it. This is the only ref I looked into, but there may be others similarly dubious. María(habla conmigo) 21:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the references are missing important information, including but not limited to author, publisher, and access date. There is also no need to point out that they are English sources; that should go without saying.
I'll be brushing up on the sources, but please note that since most of the sources are online, the author is not given. I removed "english" from the sources also. Malinaccier (talk)20:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"The chocolatl was a potation of chocolate flavored with vanilla and spices, and so prepared as to be reduced to a froth of the consistency of honey, which gradually dissolved in the mouth and was taken cold.": who is this quote from? William Hickling himself? Attribution in the prose is needed, or just simply paraphrase it.
The line above it already gives attribution: "Jose de Acosta, a Spanish Jesuit missionary who lived in Peru and then Mexico in the later 16th century, wrote of it:" Malinaccier (talk)20:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't referring to the blockquote. The line before the quote I provided above reads Moctezuma introduced Hernán Cortés to his favourite drink, "chocolatl", which he served in a golden goblet. Again, that particular quote needs to be attributed and/or paraphrased. María(habla conmigo) 20:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The "History" section is confusing; there's no explanation for how "xocolatl" became "chocolate" or when the drink was first served hot. I was assuming that the original drink made by the Mayans was served cold because the article doesn't say otherwise...? It should also be explicitly stated that the chocolate drink was the original form of consumption by the Mayans and Aztecs. Or were there other forms?
Because it was so expensive, hot chocolate was considered a drink for the wealthy. This needs to be mentioned (with a ref) much earlier. So the "Chocolate Houses", although popular, were only for the wealthy? Plus, how much is "so expensive"? This must be quantified with a reliable source.
I added an earlier referenced statement, and I quantified and explained the costs of chocolate in the statement "Even when the first Chocolate House opened in 1657, chocolate was still very expensive, costing 50 to 75 pence (approximately 50.11-75.17 USD) a pound.[18]" Malinaccier (talk)01:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Hot chocolate" is a retronym and the drink was originally simply called "chocolate". The subsequent popularity of the "chocolate bar" forced the invention of the term "hot chocolate" to distinguish it from "chocolate" which now means solid chocolate. Needs a source. Also, what is a "chocolate bar"? Define.
I've sourced and restated the information about the retronym, as well as attaching it to an earlier paragraph. Also, I replaced "chocolate bar" with "solid chocolate" and explained. Malinaccier (talk)01:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Some people use the terms... while others make a distinction...: Who is "some people"? From where?
Some packaged hot cocoa mixes come with small dry marshmallows that are often called "mini marshmallows". This seems trivial. How are marshmallows "a modern American concept"? Source.
Studies have shown that hot chocolate contains large amounts of antioxidants that may be beneficial to one's health. What studies? When were they done? By whom? Proof? Charts? Something?
I fear there's a lot missing from this article. What about bean harvesting and the change of when chocolate became accessible to everyone, not just the rich? An entire modern history, including chocolate companies with hot chocolate/cocoa products, is missing, as is marketing. Hersheys? Nestle? Cadbury? How has presentation of the drink changed over the years? What about cold chocolate drink variations? I really think that this article can take some pointers from Coffee, which seems to have a fairly good layout. I also suggest finding far more reliable sources, preferably books and scholarly journals/articles, in order to better research and cite information. There is a lot more to cover here, but it's such an interesting subject that I'm sure it can be done. If you have any questions about this review, please feel free to contact me. Best of luck, María(habla conmigo) 13:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
B. 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):
In the European adaption section, paragraph 4, is there a source for this ---> "When he returned to England, he brought the recipe with him, introducing milk chocolate to Europe"? In the Terminology section, paragraph 2 and 3 are missing sources. Does Reference 22 cover this ---> "In Europe, most forms of hot chocolate are very thick due to being made directly from chocolate. In the United Kingdom, however, hot chocolate is often of the thinner variety. As Europe was where hot chocolate was first popularized, many different forms exist" and "Even more variations exist. In some cafes in Belgium, one who orders a "warme chocolade" or "chocolat chaud" would receive a cup of steamed white milk and a small bowl of bittersweet chocolate chips to dissolve in the milk. In England, some types of powdered drinks are actually as thick as pure chocolate varieties"? The second half of the benefits section is generally lacking citations.
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Second half of the benefits section is questionable in its neutrality. For example: "Buy raw cocoa powder from health food shops and supermarkets" should be at least reworded, and then most likely cited.
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article! Also, contact me if the above statements are answered
I noticed that repeated footnotes are not used properly. The first footnotes that are to be repeated are correctly formatted, such as:
<ref name="Riches"/> {{cite book|last=Burleigh|first=Robert|title=Chocolate: Riches from the Rainforest|publisher=Harry N. Abrams, Ins., Publishers|date=2002|isbn=0-8109-5734-5}}</ref>
The rest should then be formatted thusly:
<ref name="Riches"/>
However, all repetitions of a footnotes are formatted as though they were full footnotes. This might not make it harder on readers, but it makes it a lot harder on the random editor, and with absolutely no benefits. Could the main author please switch to the less code-heavy method?
I believe I've made all of the suggested changes (though I give Peter Isotalo credit and my thanks for fixing the references while I was on vacation). Could you please review my efforts? Malinaccier (talk)01:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, after reading the article, I have gone off and passed the article. Congratulations. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. Thank you to Peter Isotalo and Malinaccier who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. ;) -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE)01:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be so wrong to change the introduction of the article to make it clear that the terms "hot chocolate" and "hot cocoa" are two terms commonly used interchangeably, but technically refer to two seperate drinks? Hot chocolate made from milk, melted bar chocolate and sugar and hot cocoa made from milk, sugar and cocoa powder. Then what instant cocoa/chocolate, chocolate drink and drinking chocolate are could be clarified seperately? These terms are aparently not specific across the english speaking world considering the lack of consensis. The clarifications in the first paragraph are very misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.209.78.71 (talk) 12:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm so glad you were able to find and use book sources for this article! It's already improved since last time I read it. One suggestion I have, however, is to use specific page numbers for book sources (Burleigh, for example) as per WP:CITE#FULL: "Page numbers should be included whenever possible in a citation that accompanies a specific quotation from, or a paraphrase or reference to, a specific passage of a book or article." Good work! María(habla conmigo) 01:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are multiple citations from each book from many different pages. Because I didn't directly reference specific passages or pages in the books I used, these are not required. Thanks for the suggestion! Malinaccier (talk)01:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This was added, but it wasn't put in a good spot and it seems to be one theory in a book about one researcher. I'd like to see it discussed as far as who it should be included. Should it be given context that this is one researchers conclusion?
Hot Chocolate was actually originated from an Indian tribe in South Africa. Brett George Wood a European archeologist has found many cup like utensils that these groups drank this ritual beverage from. ref name="M&M's" cite book|last=Manson|first=Diane|title=The History and Works of Brett G. Wood|publisher=Hillroy Publishing|date=2001|isbn=1-57091-448-6 /ref ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:09, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I did the research for the rest of the article and as far as I can see, the creation of hot chocolate is attributed to Central and South Americans (and I believe cacao trees are indigenous to Central and South America so I don't see Africa being viable). Malinaccier (talk)22:49, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a diffrence? I was under the assumption that Hot Coca was made with Coca Powder, and sweetened to tase, while Hot chocolate was made from Chocolate OR Chocolate Powder, yet the wiki page says they are the same. As far as i know, Chocolate IS diffrent from Coca, correct?
218.168.162.241 (talk) 08:15, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article asserts that chili pepper was "replaced" with vanilla in the european adaptation of drinking chocolate in this passage:
"The first recorded shipment of chocolate to Europe for commercial purposes was in a shipment from Veracruz to Sevilla in 1585.[8] It was still served as a beverage, but the Europeans added sugar to counteract the natural bitterness and removed the chili pepper, replacing it with vanilla, cinnamon, and other spices."
however earlier in the article it is acknowledged that vanilla was part of the original aztec formula for this beverage:
"...when Montezuma (then tlatoani of Tenochtitlan) introduced Hernán Cortés, a Spanish conquistador, to xocolatl in the 16th century. What the Spaniards then called "chocolatl" was said to be a beverage consisting of a chocolate base flavored with vanilla and other spices that was served cold."
As vanilla is a spice indigenous to Mesoamerica, and there is a wealth of evidence that it was used in preparations of drinking chocolate for many centuries prior to the Spanish conquest, it seems clear that the phrasing of the passage concerning the European adaptation ought to be changed to clarify this. I have decided to replace this passage with the following text:
It was still served as a beverage, but the Europeans added cane sugar to counteract the natural bitterness and removed the chili pepper while retaining the vanilla, in addition they added cinnamon as well as other spices."
If anyone objects to this rephrasing please let me know. Thanks.
Can someone give advice on the picture added on February 5, 2010. It just looked suspicious to me and I didn't expect ancient Mayans to employ a gesture so similar to modern usage. Also, did Mayans drink out of cans? How do we know the story and people depicted in this situation? What temple or codex did it come from? What Mayanist gave us the interpretation we read here?
Judging by its style and subject matter, It would appear that the picture is authentic, probably taken from the side of a mayan codex vessel from the Classic Era like the one at the right,A mayan codex vase although without the requisite context, this is difficult to ascertain. As I am not an expert in Mayan script, I cannot say what the inscription means, but it seems likely that the substance represented is indeed a preparation of hot chocolate as this activity was often depicted on such vessels. As for the Maya drinking chocolate from "cans", this is obviously anachronistic as the only metals the Maya used were small amounts of copper, gold and bronze, most often for bells and ornaments.(in any case "cans" in the modern sense weren't invented until 1810 and didn't come into widespread use until the mid-19th century.) Taking into account that the contributor is Danish and claims (on his/her user page) to be able to contribute in an intermediate level of English, It would seem likely that "can" is simply a mistranslation of the Danish for "jar" or "vessel" which would be accurate as the Maya often stored hot chocolate in lidded tripod jars, before pouring the beverage into smaller cups. Pending attribution, I have decided to change the word to jar and post a request for context on the image page. WaynaQhapaq (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Per [1] I removed the claim. The given source doesn't claim it's proven, in fact it doesn't discuss beneficial effects much at all. Claiming something like that is 'proven' is a rather extreme claim. And the source itself is CSPI an advocacy organisation so should be used with care. Mentioning possible benefical effects may be okay, but needs to be done in a different way and with a better source. Our article itself is somewhat reflective of the fact as with many dietary things, sayings it's definetily good or bad is not really possible. I considered rewording it myself to something like "Some studies have shown some beneficial effects from small amounts of caffeine." but that's what weasel wordish nor do I have a source. Nil Einne (talk) 16:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find a scientific reference for the caffeine content of chocolate, cocoa, cacao, or any other chocolate products. The Wikipedia page for chocolate says nothing about caffeine. It might be the case that chocolate products do not actually contain any caffeine unless it is intentionally added. Searching the web for caffeine content of chocolate brings of several websites that list a caffeine content, but never cite a source for the data. Other websites say that it is a myth that chocolate contains caffeine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jraudhi (talk • contribs) 05:21, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In Europe, particularly in countries where skiing is a popular winter sport, chocolate is regarded as the post exercise treat. While most adults will enjoy their hot wine, kids and adults with a sweet tooth will go for hot chocolate. And like most, hot beverages, hot chocolate consumption generally increases with colder temperatures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lnrod (talk • contribs) 20:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified one external link on Hot chocolate. 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.
I have just modified 2 external links on Hot chocolate. 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.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A GA from 2008. Some problems include uncited statements like
However, mixes can vary widely (between countries and often between brands) in ingredients included, their ratio and their quality.
Today, hot chocolate is consumed for pleasure rather than medicinally, but new research suggests that there may be other health benefits attributed to the drink
...hydrogenated oils, or fats.
Some brands also contain hydrogenated oils and fats, the most common of which are coconut derivatives.
There are also some other problems such as
I'm not convinced that the ingredients section is broad enough. It barely mentions any addons and could probably be expanded.
Looks like this one might need to be delisted. There's not enough information about global usage or about terminology/ingredients (which should really be one section) to meet broad coverage. Its health information should also be subject to stricter citation requirements per WP:MEDRS, meaning that there shouldn't be any citation issues in that section. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:37, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Health section - opposition to chocolate by Catholic Church
The comment that chocolate was "opposed by the catholic church" is misleading given that Catholic religious played a great part in actually popularising chocolate amongst Europeans (see e.g. the Dominicans under Bartolomé de las Casas). Rather, it was considered by some Catholics to be incompatible with asceticism, but they were making these comments precisely because chocolate was popular in Catholic religious establishments. It was prohibited in certain Catholic monasteries/convents as they thought it went against religious abstinence, as the same might ban wine or rich foods, but that is not the same as the Catholic Church as a whole speaking against it. 37.182.93.217 (talk) 07:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be misnormal if you stop to reflect, since anyone can eat chocolate, regardless of whether you have religion or not, whoever said that, he rapidly need introduce a reliable source that remain it, because may have doubt in it. 177.105.94.73 (talk) 16:19, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2024 and 13 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Loza.Sxrx, DolmaDiva1805 (article contribs).
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 February 2019 and 13 March 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wikigirl 0690.
Linked. Malinaccier (talk) 21:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
