Talk:History of chocolate/GA1

GA Review

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.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Rollinginhisgrave (talk · contribs) 05:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: It is a wonderful world (talk · contribs) 17:17, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

I'll do this :)

Criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments

As I read through, I am making some copyedits I believe to be minor and not worth discussing. If you have any issues with them, feel free to revert or reply to this comment for discussion.

Thankyou!

When referring to centuries, sometimes numbered phrasing is used (e.g. "18th century"), and sometimes worded is used (e.g. eighteenth century). I don't believe there is any MoS guidance on this, but it should be consistent within the article.

 Done

There is a bunch of harv/sfn citation errors. I would recommend installing User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.js to help you identify these errors as you would any other citation errors in the future.

 Done Downloaded and fixed, thankyou

Lead

Looks good.

Etymology

Another theory suggests that chocolate comes from chocolatl, meaning 'hot water' in a Mayan language. However, there is no evidence of the form 'chocol' being used in a Mayan language to mean hot.: I believe the second "in a Mayan language" can be removed.

Y Removed

Despite the uncertainty about its Nahuatl origin, there is some agreement that chocolate likely derives from chicolatl: For all the other possible origin words, the language they were used in is stated. "Chicolatl" comes out of nowhere. Where and when did this word come from?

Y Specified that this is a Nawa word and added some context.

Early pre-Columbian

Evidence of cacao domestication exists as early as 5300 BP: Is there a reason for using BP, when the rest of the article uses BC?

Y Changed to circa 3300 BC

as early as 1900 BC. Archaeological evidence from the Gulf Coast of Veracruz, Mexico, demonstrates cacao preparation by pre-Olmec peoples as early as 1750 BC.: "as early as" is editorializing and copied from the source.

clock How's this? demonstrates cacao preparation by pre-Olmec peoples by 1750 BC ?

That looks good, the previous sentence has another instance of it though. It is a wonderful world (talk) 09:00, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Linguists Kaufman and Justeson have traced the root of the word 'cacao', kakaw(a), to the Olmec civilization around 1000 BC.: Shouldn't this be in the etymology section?

 Done Removed. They were trying to demonstrate early evidence of consumption, with this being a linguistic approach. It's a bit redundant now as proof for early consumption, and since cacao and chocolate have separate etymologies, I'm inclined to keep the etymology section on chocolate rather than sharing it with cacao.

I see, makes sense. It is a wonderful world (talk) 09:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Mayan

Nevertheless, the majority of cocoa consumed was imported: It is unclear where and who this would be imported from.

clock Specified primarily from Chontalpa, Tabasco.

Looks good It is a wonderful world (talk) 09:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Aztec

an imagined austere idealised past: It could just be bad reading comprehension from me, but what links their austere past to indulgence in the present? Were they trying to maintain this austerity? In that case, it wouldn't really be in the past.

It's like how some people say they are using "good old fashioned manners", with an image of the past where everyone was polite and now society is fallen.

Per MOS:DASH, you should either use spaced en dashes, or unspaced em dashes. You used spaced em dashes so I removed the space.

Mole poblano, a sauce containing chocolate commonly associated with the Aztecs originated in territory that was never occupied by Aztecs only after the Spanish invasion: This doesn't make sense, I'm unsure it's trying to convey.

clock While mole poblano, a sauce that contains chocolate, is commonly associated with the Aztecs, it originated in territory that was never occupied by them and only after the Spanish invasion. Is this clear?

Apologies, I somehow missed this point earlier. I understand it all up to "and only after the Spanish invasion". Is it trying to say that the land was only inhabited after the Spanish invasion?

It was only invented after the Spanish Conquest, which is why the common belief of it being eaten in a pre-Columbian Mesoamerica is wrong. The land was inhabited, but not by the Aztec Empire. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 11:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

While mole poblano, a sauce that contains chocolate, is commonly associated with the Aztecs, it originated in territory that was never occupied by them, and the sauce was only invented after the Spanish invasion Makes that clearer for me. What do you think? It is a wonderful world (talk) 12:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Looks great, putting that in now. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 12:11, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Introduction to Europe

Cacao was produced using forced labour under the encomienda labor system, and during the 16th century native Americans experienced a massive population decline and production decreased: If these two clauses are causal, a stronger more precise connective like "which caused" would be clearer. If they are not related, they should be separate sentences.

 Done Split up.

Such was the rarity that during the Inquisition in one case a man claiming the fact he prepared the morning chocolate rather than his wife as proof that she was a sorcerer-witch.: What the hell lol

She then got imprisoned, and in jail one of her few possessions was listed as "chocolate" haha

I feel like this would be a good DYK. Perhaps one of us could nominate it after the GA process?

Please do! Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 10:47, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

this distinction was important for determining if consumption violated ecclesiastical fasts: I feel ecclesiastical fasts should be wikilinked. Red link or blue link to something related?

 Done Linked Fasting and abstinence in the Catholic Church

Modern era

I think the sections should be reorganised. It doesn't flow well having a chronological section (Popular consumption) interjected by a topical section (African cacao cultivation), before returning to the chronology (Post-WWI). Perhaps switch "Post-WWI" and "African cacao cultivation"?

I did switch them. I don't love it. I could try to integrate it if you think that would be better, but I do also think there's value in separating it.

I also think there's value in separating it. Why don't you like the current order of those sections? It is a wonderful world (talk) 09:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Mainly because I find it a bit weird to go from 2013, back to the 19th century when it flowed into the "Today" section before. Also because the end of the pre-WW1 section flowed well into it, as it was discussing the driving force behind the increase in production.

On second read though I agree. I think the original was better. It doesn't fit really well anywhere because the article is mainly chronological except that section, but there is value in splitting it, and your arguments for the original order are better. It is a wonderful world (talk) 11:26, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I'll split it up and you can tell me if you prefer that or the original Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 11:34, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Looks great now. It is a wonderful world (talk) 12:06, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Tempering, the process of cooling and heating chocolate to form a crisp break and glossy appearance, was developed by 1931. This produces a snap upon breaking and gives a glossy appearance: Repeats itself, I didn't fix it myself because I'm not sure where the citations are best to go.

 Done removed duplicate

In 1956, chocolate made with some cocoa butter substituted for cocoa butter equivalents, cheaper fats with similar properties to cocoa butter, were launched in Britain: This sentence is really hard to read. Perhaps use some more varied punctuation.

 Done In 1956, chocolate containing cocoa butter substitutes was launched in Britain. These substitutes, which are cheaper fats with similar properties to cocoa butter, only replace some of the chocolate's cocoa butter.

Much clearer. Looks good. It is a wonderful world (talk) 09:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Today

Looks good :)

Sources

[1]: No problems

[2]: No problems

[3]: No problems

[4]: I can't figure out how to enable page numbers on the source (if it's possible), but a search for "chicolatl" provides only one passing reference which does not back up the claim made in the article.

It's in the abstract, broken up phonetically. "This study also discusses the linguistic details of vocabulary for drinks made from cacao; shows that no proposed etymology for the word chocolate is correct, but agrees with Dakin and Wichmann that its proximate source is a Nawa form chikola:tl". I think another source described this as written as chicolatl, but I can't find this, so just returning it to chikola:tl. Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 05:27, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I should have read the abstract. It is a wonderful world (talk) 09:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

[5]: Same as citation 4, but I searched for "cacao beater" which has no results. Since this is a direct quote in the article, it is definitely not supported by the citation.

I was missing a hyphen oops Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 05:27, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Ah yes, looks good now. It is a wonderful world (talk) 09:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

[6]: No problems

[7]: Page 2 should also be cited for the 5300 BP part

 Done

[9]: No problem

[14]: No problem

[20]: No problem

[24]: No problem

[33]: No problem

[38]: No problem

[39]: No problem

[48]: No problem

[50]: No problem

[58]: No problem

[64]: No problem

[73]: No problem

[78]: No problem

[93]: No problem

[92]: No problem

[105]: No problem

[121]: No problem

[127]: No problem

[137]: No problem

[156]: No problem

Images

Well illustrated, good captions and licenses look correct.

What an enjoyable read! I'm amazed at how much literature there is on this subject, even the etymology of the word is really complicated! You did a great job of synthesizing everything to create a broad balanced article.

Thankyou so much for your review. I've addressed all of your points Rollinginhisgrave (talk) 05:27, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Most looks good. I replied to few above. It is a wonderful world (talk) 09:19, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Passing :) It is a wonderful world (talk) 12:41, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

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