Talk:Chicken as food/Archive 1

Archive 1

Original research

Overall this is a good article, and I agree that much of what it says is "common knowledge". However, it still needs to abide by the Wikipedia policy of Verifiability. Can we not find any books or references that can be used as sources for the information on this page? --NovaSTL 21:26, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not so great. I removed the thing about chicken feet being popular in Jewish cuisine and being used in chicken soup, because, as a Jew, I've never seen chicken feet being cooked, served, or eaten as part of Jewish food, regardless of Jewish ethnic group. My mother NEVER makes soup out of chicken feet! (I've never seen anyone eat chicken feet, for that matter.) If such a blatant error could be made, I'm wondering what other errors there may be in this article. Hiergargo 03:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I've actually eaten chicken feet in Chinese restaurants. Depending on the recipe it can be so-so or delicious. Freid chicken ='s mmm mmm goodness :-) Han-Kwang 14:21, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

For the record - my (Jewish) mother always used to include the chicken legs in soups and boiled chicken dishes. This was the traditional Jewish recipe, probably of Galician (polish) origin, since that is where most of the family came from. The feet were considered a delicacy. That was in England - here in Israel the chickens come more fully prepared and already lack feet. Ze'ev Yisroel, Jerusalem 213.8.87.25 09:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

What in this article is "original research"? I removed the part about creating a capon about a month ago (while I was on my IP address, not logged in) as it was really disgusting and not relevant to chicken as a food. Anyway, a section on the use of chicken in cusines across the world, perhaps including its history, could be a valuable addition to this page.--Grendlefuzz 12:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Any assumptions that are not cited qualify as OR. Statements such as Chicken serves as one of the most common meats in the world. . . do not cut it in a verified-based encyclopedia. z ε n .ıl 06:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Citations

Could someone please put the citations in correct wikipedia formatting? I'm not sure how to. Thanks in advance.--Grendlefuzz 18:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I've set it up for you, but I question the third source you use. Usually it's not good form to cite another encyclopedia, because they often cite from other sources, and so on. I'm sure history on Chicken should be relatively easy to find, but even so, I'm suprised there isn't more to this article. z ε n .ıl 06:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Additives

There's a section in the chicken-bird article about growth hormones and anti-biotics added to their food and the human concerns over this. because this is also important to the chicken-food article, I would like to see it included. Naysie 06:19, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

In the USA, growth hormones are by law not allowed in poultry or swine. FDA rules specify withdrawal of any therapeutic drug to eliminate residue from meat. see: http://envirocancer.cornell.edu/factsheet/diet/fs37.hormones.cfm with associated bibliography and www.fda.gov for more information. --Dr Bird (talk) 13:49, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Nutritional value

The Nutritional value per 100g has no trans fat, since chicken is meat there should be some trans fat, or am I wrong. Samuel 02:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

You obviously didn't read the article that you linked. 134.250.70.81 00:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you've seriously confused saturated and trans fat. Trans fat is from artificial stuff and processing (Crisco and similar), while saturated fat naturally occurs in animal products. If the chicken you consume contrains trans fat, there's something wrong.--Grendlefuzz 16:39, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Cooking section

I have a slight issue with the Cooking section, which states that chicken is never eaten raw. Tori-sashi is, while not omnipresent in Japan, definitely available. Madball911 02:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

dark meat

i american media i hear reference to dark meat, is this the rib meat mentioned in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.52.71 (talk) 17:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Dark meat = the walking muscles, so the legs of a chicken. 83.100.175.94 (talk) 22:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, historically, the term "dark meat" referred to the thigh of the chicken- at the time of its creation, the use of the word "breast" or "thigh" was considered a bit racy- to refer to specific parts of the chicken anatomy without them, people used the terms "white meat" for breast, and "dark meat" for the thighs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.56.57 (talk) 00:28, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Chicken Bones

The article mentions that chicken bones are not edible. I'm wondering what reason they are suggesting this for? If you make bone-meal from chicken bones, technically that should not pose a health risk, should it? JettaMann (talk) 20:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree, the splinters are dangerous, but that doesn't make them inedible. Salanth (talk) 16:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

And yet another agreement. I've been eating chicken bones - all of them - since god knows when. I'm now 58 and still alive, so I'd disagree that chicken bones are inedible. 68.99.252.93 (talk) 21:07, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Chicken as a scarce delicacy?

• Here in England there was a tradition that roast chicken was an expensive delicacy, until recent mass rearing of roasting chickens made that untrue. When I was a small boy (I was born in 1942) we had roast chicken only at Christmas - but that was during post-WWII rationing. Before WWII, and back to the Middle Ages, who (town rich, town poor, country gentry, peasants) ate how much of these sorts of chicken?:-
  1. Chickens fattened for roasting, not caponized.
  2. Chickens fattened for roasting, caponized.
  3. Surplus cockerels hatched by sitting hens and not well fattened because they had had to compete with laying hens for scraps and scratchings, and/or were not of a meat breed.
  4. Boiling fowl: old hens that are no longer laying enough eggs to be kept any more.
  • Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:53, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Cholesterol

• The article has a lot of talk about how bad cholesterol is for you. Firstly, I think this is inappropriate and irrelevant in an article about chicken. Sercondly, I'm not sure there is actually still debate about this among researchers who study the effects of dietary cholesterol. It's pretty clear at this point that dietary cholesterol has little effect on blood cholesterol. Suggestions to the contrary are basically continuing to entertain old wives' tales. There is no reason to cite this, however, as I feel the section simply needs removed. Just a suggestion.

184.13.132.167 (talk) 14:59, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Which do we eat?

Just wondering is it mostly roosters/cockerels or hens that are produced for human consumption? Or certain amounts of both?109.76.74.187 (talk) 16:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Appalling writing

This page is horribly written. It's absolutely riddled with grammatical errors and appears to have been written by a 14-year old. Can we get this page unlocked so it can be re-written and properly edited? 124.169.6.3 (talk) 04:18, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 May 2015

Category:Smoked meat 24.165.80.219 (talk) 23:25, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Not done: Said category is for specific meat that are always smoked. Chicken is not always smoked. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 23:55, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Genetically Modified Chicken

Keeping in view of the growing concern, the subject section should be added under the category "Health" for the benefit of the readers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.233.34.220 (talk) 01:47, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

BBC Programme

There's a lot of material in this radio programme which someone might wan to include here - including the 1951 competition in the USA, and stats about the numbers of birds consumed in various years, in the UK and globally. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:17, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 14 May 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved.(non-admin closure) Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:06, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

---

Chicken as food → Chicken (food) – Talk:Anchovies as food#Requested move 22 September 2014 says to nominate other food-related articles separately. – GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 20:59, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

@GeoffreyT2000 and Dicklyon: This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:22, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

• This proposed move is the opposite of what the linked RM says to do. What's that about? Dicklyon (talk) 21:42, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
• And we need to distinguish from "food for chickens to eat". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:22, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose since the rationale seems nothing but confused. Dicklyon (talk) 04:29, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

• Comment GeoffreyT2000 is requesting to revert an undiscussed move; User:Palmount45's unilateral move of this article last month (from Chicken (food) to Chicken as food) cited the anchovies move as justification, but the anchovies move closure says "if other moves are desired, please propose them separately". Personally I support the current title chicken as food, but there's nothing confused or incorrect about GeoffreyT2000's rationale. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 05:52, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I see the meaning implicit in his rationale now. He wanted to move it against the outcome of the cited RM because it said "nominate". That's really not much of a rationale; if he objects to the move, he should say so, and why. Anyway, I still oppose because the outcome of that RM seems pertinent here. Like you, I support the current title. Dicklyon (talk) 06:49, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose per Dicklyon and "what do chickens eat?" potential confusion. Randy Kryn 14:17, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose, no rationale given, RM in question has the opposite result from the nominators proposal.  InsertCleverPhraseHere  21:39, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

• Note WP:NATURAL (#1). —  AjaxSmack  14:26, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - it is confusing and no rationale has been given. CookieMonster755 ^{📞 ✉ ✓} 18:47, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Cooking Methods

Soiled Chicken- one relatively obscure cooking method, known as soiled chicken, hails from the northern regions of Mexico. According to common lore, soiled chicken produces succulent, juicy results by means of conductive heating through contact with the earth. The procedure is simple; the results are surprising: a medium size hole is dug in the ground in an open field far from any tall objects which might cast a shadow on the cooking area. The chicken is then buried in the hole and covered with the soil. After 12 hours, the chicken is unearthed and eaten, fully cooked. Care must be taken to bury the chicken during the heat of the day when the ambient air temperature rises above 110 degrees Fahrenheit, as conductive heat transfer and the effects of insulation will cause the chicken to slow cook to perfection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JBayless (talk • contribs) 16:43, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Chicken as food. 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/20040519004032/http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Fact_Sheets/Chicken_Food_Safety_Focus/index.asp to http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Fact_Sheets/Chicken_Food_Safety_Focus/index.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720014201/http://nuinfo-proto4.northwestern.edu/nutrition/factsheets/lipids.html to http://nuinfo-proto4.northwestern.edu/nutrition/factsheets/lipids.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.foodnetwork.com/food/mh_chicken/text/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040519004032/http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Fact_Sheets/Chicken_Food_Safety_Focus/index.asp to http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Fact_Sheets/Chicken_Food_Safety_Focus/index.asp

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: 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) 19:55, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Could the 'wooden/woody breast condition/syndrome' be worth mentioning?

• The woody breast condition affects texture characteristics of both raw and cooked chicken breast meat Atlas of Science
• "Woody breast" could bite the chicken business CBS News
• The poultry industry digs for solutions to woody breast Poultry Times
• Belgian company claims to have cracked the code on 'woody breast syndrome' Meat+Poultry

Google Search gives many more hits than just these. I would add a few words about this 'wooden breast condition' to the article myself, but for some reason I'm blocked from editing the article. 195.191.241.14 (talk) 18:02, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposed Introduction Change

In the introduction, "The poultry farming industry that accounts for chicken production takes on a range of forms across different parts of the world. In developed countries, chickens are typically subject to intensive farming methods, while less-developed areas raise chickens using more traditional farming techniques." should at least be tagged as citation needed. While, anecdotally it is likely true, anecdotally doesn't really work for an encyclopaedia. 75.144.18.75 (talk) 09:27, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

World production figures

We should have some world production figures. Can anyone help? --2402:1980:8180:CF9B:89A5:C17A:2046:7434 (talk) 07:35, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Low quality article

The article is of low standard and should be marked as needing improvement, including the referencing.

Many references are mediatic (news, blogs) on a subject where there is no shortage of solid references. The origin of chicken is mistaken. The description of "Blancmange" is wrong. Ironically, hovering over the link shows what a blancmange is.

There are a number of sentences which are below quality. One example: "Raw chicken maintains its quality longer in the freezer, as moisture is lost during cooking" and in fact most of the "Freezing" section which has no place in an article on chicken.

Jpgcwiki (talk) 23:39, 2 March 2019 (UTC)