Talk:Coffee milk/Archive 1

Archive 1

Template:Coffee

While coffee milk is definitely a coffee-derived beverage, its proportions and general composition leave me a bit unsure as to whether it should — or how it should — be included on the template included in several coffee-related articles in this Wikipedia edition. Any thoughts out there? — ArkansasTraveler 21:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

US centric?

On what grounds is this US centric? Unless there's a good argument for coffee milk being associated with a place other than Rhode Island, I'm going to take it out. Twin Bird (talk) 01:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

"Coffee milk" is not used in New Zealand, and I presume Australia, at all (indeed nothing like the drink describe exists here), and there doesn't seem to be any evidence South Africa, the United Kingdom or any of its constituent nations, or Ireland using it either. If no one objects in one week, I will remove the tag. --JNZ (talk) 02:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Since there has been no objections so far, I have taken out the US-centric tag. I understand the original contributor who added the tag was an Australian, and note that coffee milk is not used in Australia at all - all searches on "coffee milk" among Australian sites fail to come up with anything specific. --JNZ (talk) 08:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

We don't use the name "coffee milk" here in NZ, but coffee flavoured milk is definitely available. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.173.145.117 (talk) 09:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course the article is US-Centric. Maybe unintentionally so, but the tone of the article is that the physical combination of coffee and milk is unknown outside the US. The article should clarify that, while Rhode Islanders may feel like they own the name because it's their state drink (it supplanted lemonade, after all), the practice of mixing coffee and milk is known all over the world, whether you call it coffee milk, coffee flavoured milk, café au lait, or whatever. Jeez! Pavium (talk) 14:06, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Please note that coffee milk is not a combination of coffee and milk. It is a combination of coffee syrup and milk. The drink tastes nothing like coffee and milk combined would taste, nothing like cafe au lait, or whatever. I would know as one day as a kid working at a local eatery I accidentally put coffee into the coffee syrup machine... very unhappy customers... I can not speak for other countries, but none of my family who are spread across the USA can find coffee syrup anywhere but southern new england around Rhode Island. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.14.65.213 (talk) 17:18, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Link to Japanese article

I removed the link to the Japanese article because it was about a prepackaged mixture of ready-to-drink sweetened milk and coffee sold in Japan (コーヒ牛乳), not the syrup-based product from New England and Rhode Island. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.11.71.109 (talk) 01:12, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed merger (coffee syrup into this article)

I propose merging the article coffee syrup into this article. In fact, since it's so directly relevant and not an excessive amount of text, I'm going to be copying some of the content from there anyway. Coffee syrup currently cites no sources and even has several visible errors on the page -- I'm not sure why it's needed beyond this drink (it's "coffee milk" that is the "official state beverage" not "coffee syrup" -- meaning its claim to notability is very small). --— Rhododendrites ^talk |  20:01, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Update: I've withdrawn the merger proposal. It became clear that coffee syrup offered nothing on top of what was already said here. It doesn't cite sources and its notability seems to stem from coffee milk being the official state drink (i.e. this is the notable article, not coffee syrup). See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coffee syrup for the AfD. --— Rhododendrites ^talk |  21:09, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Recent changes

I just finished making some heavy revisions to the article. Most significantly, the history section was severely lacking in references and included elements of a narrative I haven't seen reflected in the sources I've come across. In the availability section there were also several sentences without sources and of questionable importance (i.e. notability and WP:UNDUE) like how coffee milk is available at URI and that it "confounds" out-of-state students. I removed the timeline as unnecessary given a more thorough history section. I did a quick search for an older image to display -- something from Eclipse's days of promotion in the 30s/40s -- but with no luck. If anyone has such a thing and it's license-appropriate, that would be great to have. --— Rhododendrites ^talk |  21:09, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Coffee syrup turned into redirect because anything useful was already merged

I'm all for keeping usable content from deleted pages, but as I tried to explain at the AfD and as reflected in the closing admin's comments (who closed it was redirect and not merge for this reason), all of the usable content from coffee syrup was already incorporated here. The history section here article-ized the timeline and much of the other content, which also included several unsourced statments that were either trivial or contradict existing sourced statements. The section on "coffee syrup" was almost entirely redundant and inappropriate in tone (having been copied and pasted from the other article for which it was the subject). "Further reading" contained links already used on the page as sources. The exception New England Country Store Cookbook - Peter W. Smith, which is one page of a cookbook that gives recipes for coffee cabinets and coffee syrup. Maybe there's a way to incorporate this into the article, but as further reading? [done, but tagged with self-published as it's an iUniverse publication]. --— Rhododendrites ^talk |  17:49, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Coffee milk. 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/20131224101749/http://www.providenceonline.com/stories/Narragansett-Beer-Autocrat-Coffee-Milk-Stout-drink-alcohol-Providence-Monthly%2C10790 to http://www.providenceonline.com/stories/Narragansett-Beer-Autocrat-Coffee-Milk-Stout-drink-alcohol-Providence-Monthly%2C10790

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) 06:42, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

History Section

The subsections under History do not seem logical. The history is broken up between coffee milk and coffee syrup. Do these really each have their own separate history? It seems like a more reasonable layout would have section(s) on the history of consumption and/or manufacturing. These would include coffee milk and coffee syrup as one idea. Additionally, its history with the state of Rhode Island is tied to both the milk and syrup not just one. Eristev4 (talk) 16:55, 29 March 2018 (UTC)