Talk:Black and white cookie

Untitled

Some people may believe that a Half Moon Cookie and Black and White Cookie are the same thing, they're not. They look similar, but Half Moon's have more of an angel food base and are topped with a buttercream frosting, Black and White's are a cakey shortbread with a poured fondant icing.

As a manufacturer, I've often experienced many people ordering Black & White's and expecting Half Moon's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.95.246.12 (talk) 17:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

inaccuracy in main article

"Black and Whites have a drier, cookie-like base and fondant frosting."

While it is true that B&Ws have a two-toned fondant frosting, the part about the drier, cookie-like base is incorrect. The base of a B&W is clearly a cake--it is soft and moist, and slightly springy (though not nearly to the extent of a sponge cake or angel food cake.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.125.4.195 (talk) 21:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

perhaps

In light of this^ fact, perhaps we should remove the half moon comment and make half moon its own page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.202.103.133 (talk) 18:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

It's clear that most B&W are covered with Fondant, but it isn't universal. Leske's Bakery where I work in Brooklyn since 1961 has been making them with a Vanilla and Chocolate Fudge; it's soft like frosting but thicker and richer. I think even though many B&W's are based on Fondant I don't think that is as universal and monolithic as the article implies. I am interested in adding a "Variants" section to this article. Hhawk (talk) 22:06, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Popular culture

Is a stand up comedian a valid source?

The race relations conjecture could be coupled into the Seinfeld section of the article, but, having reviewed the scene in the episode, it seems that a joke about race relations does having any direct bearing on the desert itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.217.93.17 (talk) 17:22, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

A German cousin?

Yes it is and the so called Amerikaner are also available in black (chocolate) and white (fondant icing) (or at least they have been for a long time) and it's highly disputed they got their names because of "Ammoniak" and it's claimed they have been a pastry well before WW2! I'm trying to get some facts on this! --Ragoro (talk) 20:58, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Are these, which I found at a Publix supermarket in Florida, an example of the German variety? It seems to me like a "segregated", separate but equal, set of a black and a white cookie.

*Dan T.* (talk) 22:08, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

In Germany, they are called "Amerikaner". But that`s just a simplified version of "Ammoniakaner". In the past, the bakermen put ammonium carbonate into the cake, the so called "Hirschhornsalz" and this is responsible for the typical flavour.

This cake is of german origin, no doubt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.75.202.105 (talk) 09:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, we call them "Amerikaner" (American/s) in Germany but this "Ammoniakaner" story is utter nonsense! No one really knows why they're called "Amerikaner" and since when. As you mentioned ammonium carbonate is called "Hirschhornsalz" and if this would have anything to do with the name of this pastry it would sure not have been called "Amerikaner" then! Plus those pastries on that pic do not look like "German" Amerikaner! Yes, they are available with either sugar or chocolate icing or both of it but those 2 don't look like "our" Amerikaner! 92.223.57.77 (talk) 09:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Kyon Cookie

I'm a 50+ year old, "Noo Yawka", whose never heard of "Kyon Cookies". As such, I think it bears some kind of reference, footnote, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skaizun (talk • contribs) 03:49, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

they are often referred to as the Kyon cookie for its half white and half black sides.
What does that even mean? I looked up "Kyon," but all I found were references to an anime character. What does it have to do with having black and white sides? And by the way, I'm also a 50+ "Noo Yawka" (more accurately, a "Lawn Guylander") who has never heard of a "Kyon cookie" either. WaxTadpole (talk) 16:23, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Othello

I'd always thought they were called Othellos until I found this article, like the game pieces. Apparently an Othello is another kind of pastry entirely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.177.19 (talk) 10:49, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Really?

Always find it humorous when someone takes a wiki article about an American subject and tries to bring in some irrelevant connection to usually an obscure British (or in this case Australian) subject that no one has ever heard of: " It is similar to a neenish tart, although neenish tarts are filled with a cream center, whereas a black-and-white cookie is not." How is a cookie like a tart? It's black and white, not pink and blue, or whatever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.50.92.159 (talk) 01:06, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

According to WP:WORLDWIDE, such content is allowed, but it needs to be well written and backed up with WP:RS. Buffaboy ^talk 01:48, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Black and white cookie. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130928173950/http://www.beyondburgersandbratwurst.com/2007/03/29/the-black-and-white-cookie-meets-the-amerikaner/ to http://www.beyondburgersandbratwurst.com/2007/03/29/the-black-and-white-cookie-meets-the-amerikaner/

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

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: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:57, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Splitting Half Moon

If half moon cookies are a different thing than black-and-white cookies, should they be split into their own article? Or should the two be kept together because so many people confuse them? -Apocheir (talk) 03:01, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

I changed my mind after reading more; nobody seems to be able to clearly delineate the two. I've rewritten the article to reduce redundancy and use credible references (and, uh, have the references actually support the text they're attached to). Feel free to expand on this, but please cite your sources. -Apocheir (talk) 15:54, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

"Some people may believe that a Half Moon Cookie and Black and White Cookie are the same thing, they're not. They look similar, but Half Moon's have more of an angel food base and are topped with a buttercream frosting, Black and White's are a cakey shortbread with a poured fondant icing.

As a manufacturer, I've often experienced many people ordering Black & White's and expecting Half Moon's."

^I'm seconding this statement from above as someone who has lived in CNY (Central New York) and NYC (New York City), the respective homes of each cookie. (And have, less relevantly, lived in many other regions of the state.) These are two strikingly different regional cookies with only superficial resemblance, moreover both cookies also have cultural significance in and of themselves. Where the confusion arises seems to be the common issue in New York, most Downstaters don't know/care about Upstate (with often heavy doses of chauvinism...), likewise most Upstaters aren't familiar with the city (and don't care about the city). Hence, in the initial meeting these cookies *might* be confused (or atvkeast the names) due to the frosting patterns (half one colour anď half another) and people's general attempts to tie them to something familiar (like a kid calling a squirrel "bunny" or "kitty"), but upon any inspection or consumption, it become obvious they are very different cookies in taste, texture and base. This is a somewhat common occurence when someone crossing the state is met by what they initially think is their familiar cookie due to hearing about the colouration, but once they inspect it or taste it, they have a surprise reaction. This is usually followed by acceptance and/or hostility, as it was not the same cookie in any regard as to what they had heard it might be. The choice of frosting is also different. As stated, Half-Moons have a buttercream style frosting, if it doesnt have this creamy frosting, it isnt a halfmoon. Black and whites bare, by contrast, a fondant icing, which is quite a different icing type. In my personal consideration, black and whites are more of what i would dub a "tea cookie" since the foodie voice in my head sees them as best accompanied by tea to make them palatable and balanced. Halfmoons by contrast are much more succulent by nature of both their base and their frosting, the angel-food base being more akin to cake and brownie might better be accompanied by cream and milk. Albeit Im sure there are people who would enjoy a drier cookie like the black and white with milk as well.

Most of the confusion comes from the regional nature of each cookie, and superficially-similar descriptions since both share the same iconic colour-pattern of frosting and are known primarily in their own respective region. 

The grocery store where I am originally from recently has imported black and whites as well as half moon cookies, juxtaposing the two removes any doubt about these being variant names from those unfamiliar or familiar only via word of mouth. I hope my insights are useful in understanding the situation and getting both cookies proper recognition, since I feel there are not many people on here with experience in Central New York let alone experience in both CNY and NYC and familiar knowledge of the gastronomic scenes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.116.155 (talk) 17:52, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Articles on Wikipedia must cite reliable sources, not your experience. If you can find a published source that supports your assertions, feel free to add them. -Apocheir (talk) 18:03, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Obviously for the post the sources will be necessary. However this was a cursory reply to your statement that "no body can clearly delineate the two" (and about the occasional confusion's biasses and causes.) (Since the initial post by the baker and mine both provide real-life counter-examples to that.) I'll look for some written sources on the cookies and then add them to the thread for you to work with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.120.116.155 (talk) 19:21, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Racial metaphor section.

It doesnt make sense to have an entire section on how a cookie is used as a racial metaphor/ metaphor in general. Looking over the rest of the wiki articles on food, this doesnt follow the typical flow of the articles. It does not seem relevant to the food item itself or its history. It is too opinionated to be impartial and factual. 2600:8800:200B:1900:8430:C98E:851:6238 (talk) 17:40, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

This is why Im trying to edit out the racial metaphor section. It is too opinionated to be a reliable source of information. Just because there are sources to back up the claims doesnt mean its not opinionated and irrelevant to the food item itself. Plus whoever wrote this part of the article was trying to use Seinfeld as a source. How can wikipedia be a reliable source of information if we allow for opinions to get mixed in with facts and allow for fictional TV shows to be used as support? 2600:8800:200B:1900:8430:C98E:851:6238 (talk) 17:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Only one talk header was needed to state your point. The paragraph does not seem to be opinionated, i.e. "This cookie is a great/terrible metaphor for racial unity," but is rather about opinions about the metaphor. Seinfeld itself is not the source that is used; the statement appears to be from a book chapter that is about the cookie, so this statement is probably WP:DUE. I'm not sure about the other content regarding Barack Obama and Shais Rishon; a third opinion will be needed about the merit of these two statements. The former is about something Obama brought up at a campaign during the 2008 United states presedential election, while the latter is about Rishon's opinion on the metaphor. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Much of the content of this section was previously in a "In Popular Culture" section, which I renamed because all the content there had to do with its use as a racial metaphor, and because like other pop culture sections it kept attracting uncited trivia that had to be removed. For anyone who's concerned, it's worth looking at the page history. -Apocheir (talk) 22:25, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

It makes more sense for it to be In Popular Culture. Every other wikipedia page has In Popular Culture when it is discussing how the subject has been discussed or used In Popular Culture. It makes no sense for there to be an entire section on metaphors. 2600:8800:200B:1900:88B5:E7F6:3BC1:449C (talk) 22:43, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

You don't need a new header every time you comment. Anyways, I don't think "popular culture" is an appropriate description for Obama and Rishon's comments. That said, I'd like other opinions here, maybe from @LaundryPizza03 or others. -Apocheir (talk) 02:36, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Agreed, that's probably why the section title was changed to "As a racial metaphor" by the user who removed the cruft from a previous version of the section. Will "Racial metaphor" alone work as well? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:04, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Agreed that "In popular culture" is overly broad for the section, in which we only talk about use of the cookie as a racial metaphor. We might as well have a section title that reflects that. While we're on the topic, I rather like "As a racial metaphor" rather than "Racial metaphor" for a section title. It makes it clear that the cookies themselves are sometimes used as a racial metaphor. Does anyone else have a preference either way? Srey Sros^talk 03:41, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

I agree. My original edit had the "As a", but it was removed at some point during the back and forth. MOS:HEAD doesn't say much, although there might be other guidance that's relevant. I'm going to put it back for now, although I don't have a strong opinion either way. -Apocheir (talk) 19:13, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

• The subject of the section is entirely about the use of the cookie as a racial metaphor, and a subject title which indicates that is appropriate The IP will be reported for edit warring if they change it back again. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:25, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

End matter organization

If it is to be changed, there should be a consensus here about it. If there isn't a consensus, the current headings and heading levels should be maintained and editors who make arbitrary changes to their own personal preferences may and should be reverted. See MOS:NOTES, WP:CITEVAR, and this arbitration ruling. Skyerise (talk) 05:04, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Obligatory talk page post

Its all popular culture. So why not change it to popular culture so we can have more information than just three different quotes? Ive looked at the edit history and every time someone would put anything remotely interesting it would get erased.

Turning it into just 'As A Racial Metaphor' makes it a useless part of the article that is constantly sliced down to include only these three things.

Dont understand how this is the free encyclopedia if every time its edited to include more information, this info gets consistently cut out and reverted back to just three quotes. 2600:8800:2004:8100:48BB:73BD:784:F435 (talk) 14:06, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

You changing the title of a section is hardly adding "more information". You are very welcome to add another example of the subject appearing in popular culture. Right now the section is representative of what it contains, not what it 'should' contain. ~ lovkal (talk) 21:35, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Size of lead image

I and at least two other IP users, 173.70.81.70 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 2600:4040:ACE9:4B00:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), disagree on the size of the lead image. What is the optimal size:

• 220 px, the status quo, and equal to the default size for thumbnails (preview);
• 210px (preview); or
• 250px (preview)?

Note that Template:Infobox food does not accept an upright parameter, so we must specify the size of this image. The default size is equal to the full width of the File:BandW.jpg, which is 500px (preview). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:12, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I'd go with the thumbnail default, 220px. 210 is a bit small on desktop, 250 is too large on mobile. Apocheir (talk) 01:06, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I got reverted again... Should I attempt an RfC or correspondence with the IP (via talk page notification)? I have not determined the number of possibly distinct users involved. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I left 173.70.81.70 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) a note, since it has more edits and more recent edits. Apocheir (talk) 19:13, 4 October 2022 (UTC)