Talk:Baked apple

Merge from bratapfel

Bratapfel is simply the German name for baked apple. Comparing the two articles, it seems that the German version sometimes uses marzipan as well as the fillings mentioned in this article; easy enough to add. The German version is said to be served with custard or ice cream; again, these options are already mentioned in the Baked apple article. WP is not a (multilingual) dictionary. --Macrakis (talk) 22:16, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

We could but I don't think it's necessary. The proposed target will be expanded one day and shorter articles will be linked. Spudlace (talk) 06:47, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Variants of dishes are generally covered under a single article. Unless we find good sources showing that a Bratapfel is greatly different from a Baked Apple, there is no reason for a split. Indeed, one of the three sources for the Bratapfel article is a Midwestern US cookbook which simply mentions that baked apples are a "much loved Christmas dessert". The second source just has a one-line definition. The third source is a recipe from a US newspaper that glosses Bratapfel as Baked Apples.

This also means that we have two articles in the English wikipedia corresponding to one article in the German wikipedia.

Standard dictionaries give Baked apple as the translation of Bratapfel. (see https://en.langenscheidt.com/german-english/bratapfel).

With your approach, we'll end up with separate articles for all languages that have their own name for baked apples, e.g., "pommes au four", "manzanas (asadas) al horno", "mele (cotte) al forno", "μήλα (ψητά) στο φούρνο", which are all pretty much the same recipe, with no doubt some minor variations. Perhaps Greek recipes tend to use allspice; perhaps German recipes use rum more often and brandy less often; etc. But concluding tendencies like that from primary sources (cookbooks) would be WP:OR. --Macrakis (talk) 15:52, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

I looked for a duplicate article to add this content to before I created the article bratapfel and I decided this wasn't the right article because it also covers dehydrated apples. A separate article for the dish of baked apples is appropriate. I share your stated aversion to unnecessary proliferation of national variants and also agree that one article would be preferable.Spudlace (talk) 01:16, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Whether the dried baked apple (the biffin) material belongs here or not is an interesting discussion, but I don't see how it relates to bratapfel.

On the other hand, the sentence about baked apple sauce doesn't seem to belong here, agreed. --Macrakis (talk) 15:26, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Once you remove that content there isn't much left in the article other than what the consensus at AfD already decided to redirect. There is not much more to say about it than "an apple that is baked". It could be a disambiguation to dehydrated apple and German baked apples, but I don't want to merge my well-researched article into this poorly organized article that was redirected by consensus at AfD. Despite your past protestations that "The article was just on my watchlist" you are now stalking to low-level articles that I've created. Stop. Spudlace (talk) 02:31, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Clearly we're not making much progress on this discussion. I will open an RfC to get some other opinions.

As for "stalking", that is a strange claim, since the two articles are obviously very closely related. --Macrakis (talk) 18:39, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Redirect? Merge?

Macrakis, it looks like you recreated this article on 23 March 2020 against an AfD consensus to redirect to cooking apple. I've restored that redirect per the strong consensus at a previous AfD. Spudlace (talk) 02:34, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

That AFD was in 2006. The conclusion is not a "longstanding consensus", it was a judgement about the state of the articles at the time: the cooking apple article was a stub, and the Baked apple article was a two-sentence dictionary definition. The arguments for deletion were that it was a dictionary definition.

The new article I created includes a considerable amount of well-sourced new information. Now, it may well be that we should merge the new information in this article (as well as that in Bratapfel) into Cooking apple, but you have not done that; you have simply deleted this article.

If you'd like to suggest merging this article (and the Bratapfel article, presumably) into Cooking apple, I suggest you open a merge request. For now, I'm restoring the article. Feel free to add a merge tag if you like, though I don't think that's the best outcome. --Macrakis (talk) 15:22, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

No, it's an AfD closure. I agree with the reasoning in that closure as well. There is no consensus to restore this article. Stop. And stop stalking me as well. Spudlace (talk) 02:14, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Your claim of "stalking" is strange, and your uncooperative edit warring here is inappropriate. But since we don't seem to be making progress, I'll open an RfC to get some outside input. --Macrakis (talk) 18:39, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

RfC

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was no consensus; the articles have not been merged. (non-admin closure) BilledMammal (talk) 06:07, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

---

Should Baked apple be redirected to Cooking apple? --Macrakis (talk) 18:39, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Baked apple was redirected to Cooking apple in 2006 as the outcome of an AfD discussion. At the time, the Cooking apple article was quite short and the Baked apple article was essentially a dictionary definition, as mentioned in the AfD discussion.

In March 2020, I restarted the article with multiple reliable sources (with a link from the single paragraph in Cooking apple on the topic), and by November 2020, I had built it out to a substantive article with 10 reliable sources.

On November 4, I noticed that Baked apple included a link to a new article on Bratapfel (now moved to German baked apples) with substantially the same content, and some specific information about the German variant. I added merge templates to the two articles.

On November 5, User:Spudlace, the creator and primary author of German baked apples, said on this talk page "We could [merge] but I don't think it's necessary. The proposed target will be expanded one day and shorter articles will be linked." and seemed to agree that an "unnecessary proliferation of national variants" was a bad thing.

On November 6, Spudlace redirected this article to Cooking apple, without merging any of the content, based on the 2006 AfD. I reverted, asking that this be discussed on Talk. Spudlace again redirected to Cooking apple without waiting for consensus on 0Talk. On the other hand, Spudlace seems to think that German baked apples (which is a special case of Baked apples) should remain where it is. This seems inconsistent.

I have tried to engage constructively with Spudlace on Talk, but they seem to believe that they should act unilaterally, and has accused me of "stalking". They have also removed the merge template with the edit comment "rv stalker".

Having been a productive contributor to many articles on Wikipedia over the years, notably in food history, I'm taken aback by this style of interaction. I hope we can come to some productive resolution of this disagreement via this RfC. --Macrakis (talk) 19:10, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

I have at times had productive collaboration with Macrakis and some of our collaboration has led to article improvement. I want to continue that type of collaboration at some point in the future but stalking is a violation, and it is deeply disturbing to the person experiencing it.

Why is he going through my editing history in such detail over a period of months? My edits are not, to my knowledge, violating Wikipedia's policies in a fashion that would merit this style of monitoring. If they are, no one else has said anything to me about it.

Baked apple should definitely stay as a redirect. The dish is called baked apples and I don't object to its creation and a possible merger (but not to be discussed until the article is created and there are reliable sources to support merging national varieties into one article. It should not be done without showing reliable sources.) Spudlace (talk) 01:41, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

The topic of this RfC is whether Baked apple should redirect to Cooking apple; I don't know what my supposed "stalking" has to do with that.

If baked apples is a better place for the article I wrote, fine, let's move it there. It doesn't seem terribly constructive to change it to a redirect instead. And let's merge in German baked apples, which are a trivial variant and don't need their own fork. --Macrakis (talk) 20:13, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

@Northamerica1000, Ezeu, David Humphreys, Mgiganteus1, Communist47, Tree Biting Conspiracy, Coredesat, Blue520, SM247, MacGyverMagic, TedE, Mareino, Amcbride, Yamaguchi先生, and Eluchil404: You contributed to past discussions (notably an AfD) about Baked apple. An RfC is now open about a new version of the article, which has been deleted and redirected to Cooking apple. Your sage opinions are welcome for this RfC. --Macrakis (talk) 00:02, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

A "baked apple" is a prepared food that is usually made with Cooking apples (although personally, I often use dessert apples for this). The redirect is inappropriate – equivalent to redirecting Apple pie to Cooking apple, or redirecting Cooked rice to Rice. The 14-year-old AFD decision is irrelevant, especially since not one of them said that this wasn't a notable subject; they merely didn't want a two-sentence substub. The redirect should be reverted and the article restored, and then we should get down to the important questions, such as whether it's still a baked apple if you put dough around it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:25, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Baked apple would properly be a DAB page because it refers to so many different things. The content in the article overlapped with dehydrated apple. Baked apples are also used to make applesauce (a different dish entirely). They are also used for some styles of apple pie filling, all of which was covered in the article, but not in the lead sentence. But, I probably should have moved it to draftspace. I didn't know it was an option at the time, or that is what I would have done. In fact, I wouldn't object to restoring it to draftspace until it is ready for mainspace.

• • ADD: "Baked applesauce" I removed already in a previous edit [wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Baked_apple&diff=987149332&oldid=987097897], which Macrakis has agreed to as implied by his edit [wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Baked_apple&diff=987365096&oldid=987364650].

• • If Biffin were also removed and there was consensus to recreate the article (something I would not want to do without a consensus here), then I don't see any obstacle to merging either. But this process would have been a lot smoother if the article had been written coherently before any merger was proposed. It's a timesink for other editors, and I am not happy about that. When I created the subarticle on the dish of stuffed baked apples we didn't have an article for that dish. This article was a broader article covering dried baked apples and baked applesauce, content that Macrakis added himself [wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Baked_apple&diff=947150626&oldid=947146318]. Spudlace (talk) 05:59, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

    @Spudlace, why do you bake apples in the oven to make applesauce? I've only seen it cooked on the stovetop. And you actually bake apple pie filling in the oven before you put it in the pie crust? WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:31, 4 December 2020 (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.