This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
I think this article is wrong. However that may just be my Midwest U.S.A. perspective. I have never heard of a "hamburger" that did not contain ground beef. If a burger contains another meat it is called something else, "turkey burger" and "veggie burger" being the most common alternatives. Also if a hamburger has cheese it is usually called a cheeseburger, although not always. American burgers are often made with tomatoes, lettuce, pickles, onion, "special sauce", etc. -remember the Big Mac mention. In Michigan hamburgers are rarely called "hamburgs". --rmhermen
To quote from http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/HamburgerHistory.htm -
If it is in the Boston Cooking School Book as early as 1844 it didn't originate in St. Louis or Wisconsin or Pasadena or any other such place.
cut from subject page:
I occasionally hear the term "Hamburg Sandwich", though "Hamburger" and "Burger" are much more common. I've also seen it called a "Hamburg" in a collection of early 20th-Century New Yorker cartoons. -- Logotu 17:32, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I think it's worth noting that a hamburger IS a sandwich by definition, and not a variation of one.
While the hamburger is LIKE a sandwich, it has evolved to become its own seperate entity and can no longer be categorized as a sandwich. While one always refers to a peanut butter and jelly SANDWICH, a ham SANDWICH, a sub SANDWICH, one rarely says a hamburger sandwich. A sandwich is composed of two slices of bread while the hamburger is placed in its own hamburger bun. You wouldn't call a hot dog a sandwich simply because it is meat on bread, would you? The hamburger patty combined with the hamburger bun, therefore, has taken a step beyond its sandwich origins and has become a food category of its own.
Most restaurants now recognize the hamburger as being its own category of food and list hamburgers, cheeseburgers, bacon cheeseburgers, etc. in a seperate category labelled as "Hamburger". In this definition, a hamburger is anything with a meat patty on a hamburger bun. Sandwiches are typically listed in a different section of the menu.
There is a description of something that is almost certainly similar in Roman texts. Where, Apicius? or is this more like "Legend has it that the hamburger was created in ancient Greco-Roman days..." Wetman
Interesting article on the origin (german): http://einestages.spiegel.de/static/topicalbumbackground/1075/die_hamburger_hypothese.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.139.206.254 (talk) 10:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The chosen origin of the burger being invented in Hamburg, Germany, is pure speculation.
As a German I can assure you that there is no known dish from Hamburg even resembling a Hamburger. The article mentioned above is tongue-in-cheek and acknowledges that it has no foundation for its findings but speculation.
Concerning the origin it has to be said that the idea of putting ground beef between buns is not so outstanding that it might not have come to different people. The recipe with beef is however typically American since beef was hardly affordable for German peaseants. A German variant would have featured pork.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.137.33.96 (talk) 14:38, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
The origin of the hamburger is from the nomadic Central Asian Tatar people as steak tartare. The ground meat patty moved to Germany and is still popular in Northern Europe. Also a chopped raw pork “burger” is available in old town beer halls, especially Dusseldorf’s Altstadt.GreenEconomy (talk) 01:51, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't this article be merged with cheeseburger???
Update: I have suggested this article to be merged with cheeseburger, as one is a variation of the other. I'd Rather have a mod or more experienced person do it, as I may accidentaly mess it up.
Hamburger meat can be used in a variety of foods beyond just that of a hamburger patty. It can be used as a pizza topping, in Bolognese sauce, as taco meat, etc. A cheeseburger is made from the food product hamburger.CRaines (talk) 15:35, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Seriously, that picture, the second one, is all wrong. The cheese should be on top of the patty, with the lettuce, tomato, etc. on top of that. This picture, with all the stuff under the patty, is horribly nonstandard and is unsuitable for an encyclopedia artice. Zeno Izen 21:41, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
I was asked to justify why I removed the PETA link. Well, it's just not relevant. I mean, I know PETA is against eating meat, but that doesn't make a link to them that relevant. The link is quite non-sequitur. By the same justification you could add a link to some Hindu organization. On the "Beer" article you could link to Mothers Against Drunk Driving. It's just not justifiable, especially considering that PETA was never mentioned in the article text, and probably couldn't be mentioned while staying within the realm of sanity or relevance. The addition of the PETA link stinks of propagandism. That is why it was removed. Philwelch 00:18, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
PETA.org has a LOT of information about the production of hamburger in the United States. Perhaps instead of a link to just [1], should I put specific pages which are relevant to the article? I am doubtful MADD has information about the production of beer on thier website. I just think that this article should be well-rounded and approach the issue from every perspective. DryGrain 02:35, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
More specific links would be better, yes. But I wouldn't suggest that you immediately post them--animal rights groups are pretty unreliable, ethically (the founder of PETA, if I recall correctly, condoned arson and breaking and entering for "the cause", so I doubt outright lying would really give them a guilty conscience). None of us want links to biased and dishonest propaganda on Wikipedia, My suggestion would be: post the links to Talk:Hamburger, do some independent fact-checking and post some confirmation from non-animal-rights and non-vegetarian sources, and then I'll have no objections. Philwelch 04:48, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Ethics are objective. And I'm not suggesting that PETA be the only external link, however, they have video from slaughterhouses and facts verifiable from independent sources. However, I object to you requiring confirmation from non-vegetarian sources, it suggests that only carnivores are trustworthy enough to provide reliable information. It seems to me that anyone actively eating meat would start out with a bias against vegetarianism to begin with. DryGrain 02:20, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
And it would seem that any vegetarian would start out with a bias against meat. Again, animal rights activists have resorted to pretty seriously illegal and unethical actions such as arson, breaking and entering, vandalism, etc. That's why I consider them more likely to engage in propaganda and dishonesty. I mean, I could provide you with video from the Amazon jungle proving that natives regularly eat explorers but video can be falsified, and I just don't see *some* animal rights activists as being above that. Philwelch 03:05, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Furthermore, the issue is (or ought to be) well covered in Animal rights, vegetarian, and other related links. Posting information to the issue on "Hamburger" would also involve posting it on "Steak" "Pork chop", etc. Again, that would be like MADD propaganda on the article for every single alcoholic drink, including every variety of beer, every mixed drink, etc. Taken too far, Wikipedia articles may become the metaphorical telephone poles for fliers posted by any passerby who has strong opinions related to the given issue. And, eventually, the fliers will cover the telephone pole. It's just a bad precedent--take the issue to the relevant articles. Philwelch 03:11, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I'm not suggesting we add the PETA link to encourage or discorage vegetarianism or even to give a POV on the issue. The fact is, regardless of bias, there is information on the production of hamburger in the United States on the site. You can find the same information on totally neutral sites. I would not suggest adding the same information to pork choporsteak, because the information is not relevant to either of those meat products. However, I believe the article should have external links which point to information about the production of hamburger and not just the history of it. And as I said, ethics are objective. The things you mentioned that were allegedy perfomed by animal rights activists (arson, breaking and entering, and vandalism) have a common denominator: they do not involve pain and suffering of any living creature. However, the production of meat is an inherently violent process. To leave this factor out of the article is to conceal part of the truth, therefore not doing Wikipedians justice. I have added the NPOV tag to it as of today. DryGrain 06:32, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)
If you can find information on the production of hamburger on totally neutral sites, then post links. I don't disagree that ethics are objective, by the way. Read my edit history, I've worked on Ayn Rand and Objectivism pretty thoroughly. But with the PETA link removed, I think the NPOV notation has to go. It has been removed. Philwelch 03:14, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I have replaced it. I am contesting the neutrality of this article, as it focuses solely on the aspect of "hamburger as food" and not "hamburger as flesh". I respect the fact that not everyone shares my moral point of view, but I believe that for this to be a well-rounded article with a neutral point of view, it needs to have honest information on the actual production of hamburger. Right now the point of view completely leaves out the entire process of pasture to slaughterhouse to dinner table. Until this is corrected, the NPOV tag will remain. DryGrain 05:41, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
What information should be there? That cows are raised, killed, butchered, and that their meat is ground into ground beef? Isn't that information implicitly there? The article clearly states that hamburgers are made from ground beef--it's pressed into patties, sometimes mechanically, sometimes by hand. My family, we usually just buy ground beef and make the patties ourselves. Ground beef is beef that's ground, and beef is meat from cattle. Everyone recognizes that hamburgers are made of meat, what needs to be added? Nothing but your own fringe point of view. By the same standard someone could claim that Bomb isn't neutral because it doesn't make it clear that bombs kill people. Or that Soy sauce doesn't make it clear enough that we're killing LIVING SOYBEANS (in great offense to Fructarian sensibilities) to make overly salty condiments! Or that Penicillin doesn't make it clear enough that penicillin kills LIVING BACTERIA!!!
Your contest is without merit. Philwelch 07:39, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
The neutrality debate over this article is REDICULOUS! While I am against inhumane slaughter of animals, I am not against their consumption. Articles about food do not have to go into detail on how every little piece of everything comes into being.
If you really want to do that, then I suggest making a new article entitled ground beef (I haven't checked if its real yet). A hamburger is a SANDWICH. If you wish to discuss the process in which the PARTS of the sandwich are manufactured and processed, then go right ahead. But in their own separate articles. What next? neutral debates in ALL meat dishes?
I don't see NPOV debates about other sandwiches such as turkey or chicken club (mind you I don't see articles for such sandwiches either) Why don't we complain about every kind of meat, about every kind of food, Why not put NPOV debates about the harvesting of vegetables and how exploitive it is against the working class?
We are getting too anal about this, put such information in articles that would suit it better.
User:JessPKC --209.226.132.148 11:25, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Hamburger is synonymous with ground beef. If you'd like to make a ground beef article, go right ahead. I don't think its too much to ask to include the elements of production in the article. And it isn't a "fringe point of view", it's not a POV at all. It's funny how all of you omnivores are going off the deep end when I try to add something to the article that doesnt include the consumption of meat and actually something about how it is produced. If you want to lie to yourselves about what's in your sandwich, go ahead, but don't limit the Wikipedia to your euphemisms. DryGrain 20:43, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Hmmm... Seems to me that the link(s) in question might actually be more appropriate in articles such as beeformeat rather than in an entry on a particular kind of food with meat ingredients (if the hamburger article doesn't link to meat maybe it should). -- Logotu 20:52, 2004 Apr 3 (UTC)
The PETA link does not appear to be relevant, as the process by which the meat is derived is neither here nor there. By the same standard, we would be including links on how buns and pickles are made, which is not the point.
Time check. Philwelch 09:52, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)
OK. It's been over 24 hours. I think it's reasonable at this point to remove the NPOV stub and I will do so now. Philwelch 09:53, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)
The photo and its caption that I removed are extremely POV and inappropriate. Burgers are used at barbecues worldwide, and just because American Independence Day is a common barbecue for most Americans doesn't mean that burgers are "quintessentially American." –Andre (talk) 18:59, Oct 8, 2004 (UTC)
Samclem 00:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)== Origin of Hamburger ==
Seymour, Wisconsin supposedly invented the hamburger - they allegedly won a lawsuit over who invented the hamburger. They are home of the Hamburger Hall of Fame and the world's largest hamburger. Mydotnet 14:55, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)
The entire section about who invented the hamburger, which includes the recently added Fletcher Davis info, is just so much conjecture. If anyone is privy to the info about the Midway/1904/Expo/"Old Dave's Hamburger Stand" crap, please show me where I can read it. No one has ever presented any primary evidence that any of the claimants[Davis(Texas), Louis Lunch(CT), Menches(Akron), or Nagreen(Wisconsin)] "invented" the hamburger. If anyone CAN show such evidence, then do so. Otherwise, the entire speculative section should be rewritten as "legend has it." Samclem 00:56, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, why is the sentence about the patty melt under Japan? I'm not going to move it until someone confirms it was just a mistake and not intentional.
-- Not only that, but is it relevant? There's already a Patty melt entry. Osakadave 11:10, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
Doesn't 'In the mid-2000s' mean around the year 2500?
I was thinking maybe to caculate out the "calories/gram" and put it beside the number of grams. That is maybe a better indication of comparison. From the table it seems that the Whopper is the most unhealthy, but it is just the biggest. --None-of-the-Above 18:17, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
I had to add White Castle and In-N-Out Burger to the (lengthy) list of burger dependant fast-food chains; each of them because of their limited burger-only menus and their cult-like followings. --Dsutton 14:01, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
I added some stuff about Australian hamburger habits. I left what was originally written but it wasn't written by an Aussie, I can tell ;p James Pinnell 12:54, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
Added some information regarding Japanese burgers. There's a lot of interesting, very high quality burgers in Japan. When I have time, I'll elaborate more on this subject. Alexthe5th 13:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
I removed some erroneous info stating that in the UK a beefburger is different from a hamburger, and that British people would expect a hamburger to be made from ham. Sorry, that is one of the silliest things I have ever heard. The two words are synonomous. I also added a lot of extra info about a few quintessentially British innovations - the battered beefburger for instance. Also beefed up (sorry for the pun) the information regarding pub grub and inserted a reference to Wimpys, the old-fashioned UK hamburger chain.
This sentence is unfounded here... I'm not sure if it should be removed or not?
"Restaurants such as Peter Burger, although they attempt to copy McDonald's, use hamburger patties that are not 100% beef, although they claim to be." --Selena 17:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I've proposed a merger of burger and hamburger, since hamburger is an excellent article, while burger is much smaller, and nearly all the information is already here. Please discuss below... ConDemTalk 06:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
There seems to be no consensus on whether or not to merge the articles, and so I will leave them as they are, and remove the merge tags. ConDemTalk 13:27, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Ther merge tags came back, without discussion, in September of 2006. There is very, very little content in burger that isn't better dealt with in hamburger other than the treatment of different meats and the British use of the term in place of the American "patty". As such, I have proposed a move of BurgertoPatty, and intend to introduce relevant links to this article should that proposal be accepted. Discuss at Talk:Burger#Merge.2FMove. MrZaiustalk 21:41, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
In Swedish the term 'hamburger meat' usually refers to horse meat. I am curious about the etymology of this. Hamburgers in Sweden, like everywhere else, are made of beef. At least nowadays! Was the original hamburger made of beef? --Drdan 22:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
hamburgers in ancient rome were also made of beef, and they were allot closer to modern hamburgers wikipedia is wrong about the modern hamburger creation history as it was invented several thousand years before Markthemac 16:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
This section had a few subtle problems with it. I think my cleanup is reasonable. Put a See vegetarianism, because to work a vegetarianism link into the prose would have made an opportunity for npov issues and disagreements. Zeno Izen 01:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
As written the article seems to suggest Brian Peppers invented the hamburger bun:
Although this could be an amusing coincidence, I doubt it; someone probably vandalized the page, making a reference to the convicted sex offender YTMND loves to make fun of at every opportunity. Unless someone knows for sure that this *is* a cosmic coincidence, I will edit the article and remove the Peppers reference.--Caliga10 16:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't know about Saudi Arabia - but in the UK, "hamburger" generally refers to the entire sandwich, whereas the term "beefburger" is only ever used to refer to the beef patty contained within.
In fact, Brits often "shun the bun" and eat the beefburger either on its own, or accompanied by chips (french fries); peas; and/or baked beans. This was a popular childhood culinary choice during the 1970s and 1980s. 220.157.82.109 11:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
As an Englishman myself, I've certainly rarely seen anyone eat a burger in this fashion - it's certainly not something I'd describe us as often doing.
It's true that in the home cooking environment patties are sometimes eaten without buns, served with beans, chips and the like, but I wouldn't say that this is the most common method; and it's the probably the case that most hamburgers are eaten at fast food joints such as McDonald's and Burger King anyway. This is just my experience anyway, I can't speak for the entire UK, but as it is the article's description of UK terminology and preperation with regard to hamburgers seems incorrect and misleading. It's also probably worth noting that this information isn't sourced either, and so could fall foul to being original research (which is prohibited obviously). - 85.210.146.49 15:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I think it's worth noting that in the UK, the hamburger is made from a more choicer cut of beef than is found here in the US. (At least at the place I went to over there it was steak-like in quality). Jon 15:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Like Chicken Burgers, Turkey Burgers, Veggie Burgers, etc; no need to duplicate details of every type of burger under ever burger article. Jon 15:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Did anyone else see the "Donut Burger" on the news? It was a donut cut in half with the beef, cheese & bacon inside? Sounds like it would taste good, but probably kill you.Cameron Nedland 20:40, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I know that I have read in some history book that during the WWI hamburgers were renamed "liberty steak". The rationale behind this was supposedly to prevent good things from being associated with Germany. Can anyone confirm or deny this? Thanks. PJ 13:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Freedom Fries... Roses of the prophet Mohammed... happens all the time. I'd believe it--Nog64 18:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Is it my eyes, or is the photo that presumes to show mass-produced fast food hamburgers actually showing....brisket sandwiches?
Sorry, i am new but this has been vandalize by some lowbrow idiot. will someone please revert it? I love wiki..even when asshats like whoever did this do their thing, there is always the history (a feature many users and media talking heads know nothing about) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.249.107.205 (talk • contribs) 04:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
This page has been vandalized again... it should be reverted so that a hamburger patty is made of beef. thanks
I would be interested to know more about which parts of the beef are used in making hamburger. Is it just certain cuts or is it leftover scrap. Any info would be appreciated.
While the hamburger is LIKE a sandwich, it has evolved to become its own seperate entity and can no longer be categorized as a sandwich. While one always refers to a peanut butter and jelly SANDWICH, a ham SANDWICH, a sub SANDWICH, one rarely says a hamburger sandwich. A sandwich is composed of two slices of bread while the hamburger is placed in its own hamburger bun. You wouldn't call a hot dog a sandwich simply because it is meat on bread, would you? The hamburger patty combined with the hamburger bun, therefore, has taken a step beyond its sandwich origins and has become a food category of its own. [Discovery Sandwich International: The Complete, Unambiguous Sandwich Definition]
A hamburger can be made from either hamburger or ground beef. The USDA recognizes hamburger and ground beef as two different products. Hamburger allows for lean beef to be mixed with beef fat, whereas beef fat cannot be added to ground beef. [1] CRaines (talk) 15:41, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
The hamburger is unambiguously classified as a sandwich, in all but a narrow usage that I will explain shortly. In the first place, it meets any dictionary definition of a sandwich. The use of a specialized bun does not negate this classification; not only is the bun a type of bread anyway (satisfying that part of the definition), but the bun is neither exclusive to hamburgers nor required for a hamburger. The point may also be illustrated by analogy. There are many types of salads. Coleslaw is a type of salad, but since one does not say "coleslaw salad," and since coleslaw uses cabbage instead of lettuce, one might think it's a food category of its own. But then the same could be said of fruit salad, which arguably is even further from the prototypical salad than coleslaw because, unlike coleslaw, fruit salad doesn't even feature a leafy vegetable. And then there's pasta salad, which might or might not include a leafy vegetable. A similar argument could be made for cola and sodas: cherry soda, lemon-lime soda, orange soda, and cola (not "cola soda") are all sodas. One might also notice, while reading the text of the hamburger page, the numerous references to the hamburger as a sandwich, in various places, written that way (probably by various users) and apparently not disputed by anyone. There is indeed a blog post (cited above) in which someone asserts that the hamburger is an "entirely different category of food," but this isn't authoritative. The poster seems to think that the hamburger possesses qualities that set it apart from other sandwiches, and that may well be a reasonable assertion. In other words, a hamburger might be different enough from other sandwiches that some restauranteurs (in their menu-writing) and some diners (in their ordering decisions) will, superficially, classify burgers separately from other sandwiches. But even those folks, if you prod them beyond the superficial viewpoint of the menu, will understand and agree that hamburgers are really sandwiches too. Bookrede (talk) 10:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I added the following text after the part about Fletcher Davis:
In November 2006, The Texas State Legislature introduced Bill HCR-15, designating Athens as the "Original Home of the Hamburger".
The actual text can be found here. — Loadmaster 17:38, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I removed the picture of the "mass produced" hamburgers in this section, because it seemed very clear in the picture that they were roast beef (or some other type of meat) sandwiches, not hamburgers. feel free to find a new one, if you can. - President David Palmer
Is it not true that restaurants that serve a 100% beef patty are the only ones who are allowed to call their product a "hamburger"? Hence, other restaurants that do not use 100% beef cannot, e.g. Hardee's "Thickburger". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elmcken (talk • contribs)
"Thickburger" is a marketed product much like a "Big Mac." Both are made from beef. US regulations regarding what constitutes hamburger and ground beef are outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations [2]CRaines (talk) 15:43, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
These comments in "Cultural Associations" look more like an in-article discussion:-
That's what the talk page is for. If it's felt necessary to draw someone's attention to something that has caused problems in the past (and likely will again in future) then fair enough, put in a comment, but please keep it short.
If it gets as long as the stuff above, something like the following might be more appropriate:
Thanks.
Fourohfour 18:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Wouldn't the picture of a hamburger be more appropriate?--Boffob 22:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I do believe that the reference to ground beef in general as "Hamburger" or "Hamburger meat" is peculiar to the United States and is not more generally used. I think this should be noted in the introduction to the article, but don't wish to make such an edit without a broader opinion. I grew up in South Africa and the United Kingdom and had never encountered this meaning of Hamburger until I came to live in the USA. Indeed the OED doesn't even mention this as a possible meaning for Hamburger (though I am entirely aware that the meaning does exists here - I'm not contesting, just suggesting it's qualified.)
Hamburger is not the same product as ground beef, though both are made from beef [3] CRaines (talk) 15:45, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I am surprised that there is no further reference to the controversy surrounding the naming - this all seems a bit vague.
Please see Burger's Birthplace for a very recent discussion. The Erie County Fair article also lays claim to have invented it. Whilst I absolutely do not suggest we get into a war about which one is the right one, I do feel that it might be germane to the article to include the fact that there is some controversy and some of the proposed explanations.
I did not want to just add a section which would cause a big stir, if people feel passionately about it, so thought rather than I would open up a discussion on the Talk page. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 16:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I removed this edit. Any reliable sources for that information? Are patent numbers unique — freepatentsonline.com and the article modification disagree what the two mentioned patents are. Weregerbil 20:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry but this could just be me being a biased New Zealander but i was under the impression that a burger with the ingredients descibed under Aussie burger is known as a Kiwi burger, I'm not sure which is right nor who was first to create the said burger, but it definitly is contended.Guavafruit 04:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I believe this section does not maintain a neutral point of view, and lacks necessary citations and statistics for such specific information. Could someone take a look that knows a bit more on the subject? (I'm an Australian New Zealander but not a hamburger muncher). - Bennyboyz3000 07:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Even as an Englishman studying German, I've never heard the word "Hamburgian" before. Is there a source for this word, or are we using our own discretion? If the latter, I'd like to hear from people who use it. -- User:Wozocoxonoy 13:29 GMT 08/02/07
I deleted "on Meadow Street", "Louis' Lunch was serving hamburgers from its closet-sized third location in the 1970s when it had to be re-located to 261-263 Crown Street to make room for a high-rise." &『café at 115 Tyler Street on the north side of the courthouse square』as interesting, but irrelevant. Looks like somebody went a bit overboard. Vasco da Gama 23:48, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
(the following section was cut from the article...)
The concept of 'going out for a burger' has its origins in ancient Rome, where the poor living accommodation meant that it was hazardous to cook at home. As a result, street stalls selling the equivalent of 'meat in a ciabatta' rapidly became popular.[citation needed] The hamburger as ground meat can be traced back to the time when the Mongols (c. 1209) carried flat patties of lamb or mutton as a food source. Mongol riders would place the meat under the saddle; the saddle would tenderize the meat and the meat would be eaten raw. It gave the Mongols the ability to carry food, and eat it, all without dismounting from the horse.[citation needed] When the Mongols invaded Moscow, the hamburger was also brought and in turn was adopted as a cuisine named steak tartare after the invading Mongols (who were also known as the Tartars). Later, the German port of Hamburg had ships that visited a Baltic (by that time Russian) port and thus brought with it the new "tartare steak" as they would later call it. Ships from Hamburg, Germany coincidently shipped to New York also, and brought what is now known as the Hamburg steak.
In the Middle Ages, Hamburg was an important center of trade between Arab and European merchants. The theory is that Arab traders introduced Kibbeh, which is ground lamb mixed with spices, often eaten raw. The locals then adapted the dish by replacing the lamb with pork and/or beef, and more significantly, by cooking it to make a filet of ground meat, such as a "Hamburg Steak" or "Hamburger" as it eventually came to be known. From this they made a new and unique kind of Rundstück warm that came to be strongly associated with the city.
There is still a German tradition of making ground beef sandwiches, thought to descend from the original『Hamburg Rundstück,』and which tend to be elongated like an American sub sandwich, and feature very different condiments than the typical modern hamburger. These are often referred to as "German hamburgers" outside of Germany, and are served in many German-food restaurants.
Within Germany, the specific connection between the food and the city of Hamburg became lost as the sandwich spread throughout the country and became a somewhat common dish. In other countries, the historical term "Hamburger" remained in popular usage to describe ground meat rolls and sandwiches. In modern times, the term hamburger may refer to the meat patty used to make the sandwich or to the sandwich itself.
I want to know what burger king you can got to to get the double cheeseburger illustrated in the photo here! It does not resemble any I have seen--Agrofe 19:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Quote: "Important also to know that MacDonald's refused to answer about the presence of ground bones, skin and other animal rejects in their hamburgers (it is known that modern butchery widely uses this kind of reconstituted products. Industrial grinding can eliminate the hardness of some products such as bones). [4]"
That's a rather sensational claim, and as such requires a high standard of evidence. There are two problems with this citation: first of all, it's unclear as to whether it applies to merely the parenthetical statement (and the first bit is entirely uncited), or if it applies to the entire thing. Second, the source is not online, and in French to boot- so it's something of a bitch to check. When did McDonald's refuse to answer about the presence of animal rejects in their burgers? What representative of the company did so? In what context was the admission made? These are all questions that need to be answered, and the current citation just isn't cutting it. -Toptomcat 16:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
From the article: "Oprah Winfrey was sued for saying she would stop eating hamburgers when there was a mad cow disease scare as she had no interest in consuming her own." (Emphasis mine) Is that right? It sounds like a clumsy insertion to insult Oprah. The article is accurate. She made the comment on her show and was later sued by cattlemen in Texas.CRaines (talk) 15:48, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I have to strongly disagree with the sentence that states: "The fast-food hamburger began it's ascent to modern popularity with Ray Kroc and Mcdonald's in the 1950's". White Castle (restaurant) started selling hamburgers in the 1920's, and David Gerald Hogan writes in his book: "Selling Them by the Sack: White Castle and the Creation of American Food", that Billy Ingram, (one of the founders), helped to make the hamburger popular after the nation-wide scare from Upton Sinclair and his book "The Jungle". A History Channel documentary on fast food in the US, also credits White Castle with being the first major hamburger chain in America. White Castle, not Mcdonald's, was the pioneer restaurant that made the hamburger the popular food it is today. White Castle deserves more than a two word metion as just another hamburger seller.204.80.61.110 14:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)Bennett Turk
There are some discrepancies in the text regarding the Menches Brothers' version of the invention of the hamburger; it mentions both Akron, Ohio and later in the same paragraph Hamburg, New York (the location of the Erie County Fair, although there may well be an Erie County Fair in Ohio). I have no idea which version is correct so I'm reluctant to fix it. MrDarwin 17:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
No need to correct the Menches Brothers information. They were from Akron, Ohio and worked as food vendors and it was at the Erie County Fair held in Hamburg, NY when they ran out of pork and their supplier told them to fry beef. It was tastless so they added coffee, etc. as THEIR story goes....Tomticker5 21:48, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Is it really necessary to harp on the fact that hamburgers are not made of ham? I noticed this twice in the article. Is there really that much confusion about it? RossEron 13:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC) Yes, this information is necessary. In many Muslim countries the point is strongly supported that the product is indeed beef and not ham in accordance with Islamic food law. CRaines (talk) 15:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
The section on vegetarian burgers (I hate to use the words vegetarian and burger in the same sentence) should be removed as veggie ******* are not worthy of being called burgers as burgers are made of MEAT
In mentioning Malaysia, it is mentioned as "an Islamic country with a slight Muslim majority." According to the World Factbook, Muslims constitute 60%, which is an absolute majority. Second to that is Buddhists with 19%. I will change to "a predominantly Muslim country." Tamer 01:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
In many American sit-down restaurants, a hamburger is not specifically prepared "all the way", "deluxe", "through the garden", or anything of the sort. That is not what distinguishes a serious burger from the fast-food kind. Those terms would be a cheap embarrassment for a fancy restaurant. Some prominent New American restaurants and high-end steak houses do serve burgers. They do not have to include lettuce, tomato, or anything else - if they do it is often from the back garden or a local artisan farmer. It could be plain. Or it could be truffles, foie gras, sherry reduction, fancy cheese, or grilled pickled onions as a topping. What distinguishes it is good-quality, healthy meat (e.g. sustainably-raised beef from a named farm), careful preparation, real fresh bread for a bun, fresh toppings (i.e. fresh aoli instead of mayo, special mustards, house-made pickles), good cooking technique (a hot flame grill or griddle), etc. I think if we're going to opine about the state of burgers we need citations, and some real understanding of what is going on in the culinary world. Right now it looks like someone just started typing. Wikidemo (talk) 10:20, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
The U.S. Library of Congress, the research arm of the U.S. Congress, has endorsed Louis' Lunch, New Haven, CT claim to have invented the hamburger sandwich in 1900.Tomticker5 (talk) 16:12, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
In 2000, the Lassen family was approached by the government and asked to donate some artifacts for a permanent collection of American folklore for the Library of Congress in celebration of the library's bicentennial. Louis' Lunch donated historic photographs of famous patrons, magazine articles and newspaper clippings. If the Library of Congress makes the statement that Louis' Lunch made the first hamburger in the United States, just as it claims that Thomas Edison made the first phonograph, why is the reference to Louis' Lunch considered adspeak and not a statement of fact? I believe that the people who use your free encyclopedia are entitled to read the facts in a neutral point of view. The Library of Congress is a neutral reference source whose credibility should not be questioned by you. Allowing a reference to be made to a hypothetical story that was claimed to have been written by a New York Tribune reporter and mentioned so prominently in your article about the hamburger, puts your NPOV into question. The New York Tribune archives contain no such article about the 1904 World's Fair. On the other hand, the Library of Congress has pictures, newspaper articles, etc. in their collections and have stated, for the American public, that the first hamburgers were made by Louis Lassen at Louis' Lunch in New Haven, CT; this is a fact.Tomticker5 (talk) 18:24, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
I found a very reliable source to the claim of who invented the hamburger. Earl Steinbicker makes the endorsement in his 2000 and 2002 edition of his book Daytrips New England: 50 One-Day Adventures, he writes that the great American hamburger was invented at Louis' Lunch. I am not related to Mr. Steinbicker, the Lassen family or anyone else who benefits from the sale of food at Louis' Lunch. I will populate this talk page with the endorsements as I find them. There are numerous cook books, travel guides, magazine and newspaper articles that state that Louis' Lunch invented the American hamburger. Tomticker5 (talk) 18:55, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
The point is not how long the statement is, but rather that there is one. The inclusion of the statement "hamburger was invented" also appears in both James Trager's Food Chronology and Good Housekeeping cookbooks. I would expect to see the history of the hamburger written in a cookbook not an encyclopedia; it's not rocket science. I believe that the Yale Press is researching the development of the hamburger, and will publish their findings soon. Will you consider that from a neutral source? Tomticker5 (talk) 14:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
What evidence would you like to see, you've already discounted all of the evidence. Louis' Lunch isn't claiming to have invented cooking, chewing, swallowing, pizza, steakorbread. They just claim to be the birthplace of the American steak sandwich and hamburger. Louis' Lunch did not pay the Library of Congress, or any other author, for a commercial endorsement either. There are many published reliable sources too, including the largest and most respected library in the world, to back Louis' Lunch claim. A more appropriate question is, how could wikipedia allow a reference to be made to a hypothetical article from the New York Tribune, when no article has ever been found? You're using a double standard. Show me a copy of that article naming Fletch Davis and the 1904 World's Fair in the same context and I'll eat it! Tomticker5 (talk) 04:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
I think the hamburger wars are over. Apparently, man has been eating hamburger for millions of years before Louis' Lunch opened in New Haven in 1895. Of course, early man didn't need to cook their hamburgers, pre-historic man just simply ate the meat right off the bone after "the catch". I'm sure now after researching this matter for quite some time, that the first meatball or ground steak probably was invented by a pre-historic mother who chewed some raw meat until it was tenderized, then she simply spit it out into her hand and fed her young children. This explains how "hand-formed" hamburgers really got their start. Now, if you're reading this and it makes you feel disgusted, that's because the thought of our ancestors behaving in this manner offends us, but it's how they survived. Can you call what that pre-historic mother fed her children a meatball or a hamburger? There is no article about Fletch Davis and when I remove that section from the hamburger article you continue to put it back in. How can you say you're not familiar with it. Just look at the history of your edits. Tomticker5 (talk) 16:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
There's no doubt that the hamburger steak came first. But, there's a difference between a hamburger steak served on a plate with gravy, and a hamburger sandwich served between two pieces of bread with onion, cheese and tomato. All the references made to hamburger steak found in cookbooks and newspapers prior to 1895, refer to it as a steak served on a plate with gravy. It's never mentioned as a sandwich until after 1895. Louis served them that way too, until 1900, when a hurried businessman asked Louis to put the hamburger steak between two slices of bread. That was how the modern American hamburger sandwich was born. Louis' Lunch never said they invented the hamburger steak, they said they invented the hamburger sandwich. Louis' Lunch does not claim to have invented the plate, knife, fork, bread or the term sandwich either. The other people who claim they invented the American hamburger, lack any credible evidence. Louis' Lunch prepares, cooks and serves the hamburger sandwich the same way Louis Lassen did back in 1900. The other claimants have never said which stoves or gridirons they used and who manufactured them and when? Louis' Lunch evidence speaks for itself. They use the Bridge & Beach Manufacturing Co., St. Louis, MO, vertical cast iron date-stamped 1898 gas stoves with hinged steel wire gridirons that were made specifically for that vertical stove and patent protected in 1938. Tomticker5 (talk) 11:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
What are the names of the restaurants that served "hamburger sandwiches" (hamburger steak on two slices of bread) prior to Louis' Lunch? The reference you cite uses James Trager's Food Chronology as a source for the hamburger steak but fails to include Trager's reference to Louis' Lunch and the introduction of the hamburger. Do you think he's biased? Tomticker5 (talk) 12:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I believe James Trager is a reliable source when he is cited completely and accurately. Trager states that the hamburger sandwich originated in New Haven at Louis' Lunch, not by some unknown vendor in Los Angeles or Chicago. As I stated before, if there were other restaurants, like Louis' Lunch, selling hamburger sandwiches at the time, there would certainly be records of those commercial establishments. They would not exist by way of a single mention in one obscure newspaper article. And, if these places were so numerous and common, it should be easy to find information about them. Nice try. Tomticker5 (talk) 11:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
If there are records of people selling hamburgers before Louis' Lunch existed, then you should be able to provide the name of the person and the place. In other words, where are your facts? These records that you cite should be written into the article about the hamburger, don't you think? Tomticker5 (talk) 13:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Could it be at all possible we get a better picture of a homemade hamburger. The one shown is downright unappetizing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.37.157.10 (talk) 03:01, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but that ancient Roman recipe only vaguely, remotely sounds like a hamburger. There are numerous foodstuffs that call for a minced/crushed/pounded meat. In fact, the addition of cracked wheat makes it closely resemble the kibbeh found in Middle Eastern cuisine. Therefore, I don't think the recipe belongs in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.85.211 (talk) 04:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Hamburgers come from Germany, it doesnt take a genius to work it out --
It will also mention in most dictionaries that hamburgers are infact German. It also mentions on most European McDonalds adverts that Hamburgers come from Hamburg in Germany. ←≈≠≈→ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.246.56 (talk) 20:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Even Gordon ramsay when making a burger on his kitchen nightmares show uses the basic and very old german recipe *sans the bread soaked in milk*. People in germany have been putting a *burger* in a roll for a very long time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.117.150.61 (talk) 22:33, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure if you were to poll UK residents (like myself), you'd find 99% of people would have no idea what the word "flatware" means. If they had to guess (like I did) they'd probably think it means the plates that the food is served on. I was astonished when I looked up flatware in wikipedia to find out it meant Cutlery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.155.222.185 (talk) 13:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Wimpy's serves it with fork adn knife here (Canada). but nobody uses it.
Eric Forest (talk) 05:40, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
when its really a beef burger? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.186.110 (talk) 19:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
2 things. Wikipedia is not a forum, and you need to sign your posts by placing 4 tildes (~) at the end. Thanks, Genius101 T. C. 20:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
"The Oxford English Dictionary of 1802, on the other hand, defines "Hamburg Steak" simply as cured beef. " This is a mistake, since the OED wasn't even proposed as an idea until the 1850s. The first fascicles of it weren't published until 1884, and the fascicle containing definitions of words beginning with "h" wasn't published until 1901. The complete edition was only published in 1928. Accordingly, I am deleting this sentence. Lexo (talk) 11:16, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
The "Other Countries" section for some reason describes Lotteria as a chain primarily in Japan, despite the fact that Japan has its own section, and despite the fact that according to Wikipedia, Lotteria is more popular in South Korea than Japan. (Lotteria was started in Japan, however.) It then says Lotte is a South Korean company, which could be called misleading or just wrong, since Lotte was founded in Japan and currently has its headquarters there as well. I'm not really sure how to reconcile all of that with the article, but just putting it out there. 222.149.75.88 (talk) 05:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
@Vaselineeeeeeee: The idea of a hamburger being a type of sandwich is not something that should be presented as an established fact. The histories of both the hamburger and the sandwich are unclear at best and there is no direct indication that one was derived from the other. Therefore, I maintain that the uncontroversial and factual statement, "a hamburger is a food" should be used in the summary of what a hamburger is instead of describing it as a sandwich. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardkazuo (talk • contribs) 15:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Bit weird having burger and chips served directly on a table, isn't it? nagualdesign 00:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
This edit requesttoHamburger has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Otto Krause, not Otto Kuasw
The years pass, and Wikipedia is still spreading bullshit. Nobody cares to correct this obvious typo - and I cannot do it, as the page is semiprotected.. 79.7.112.133 (talk) 10:47, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
This edit requesttoHamburger has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In relation to the origins of the term Hamburger, paragraph is misleading in associating the term Hamburger with the city Hamburg; despite the source cited explicity denoting that there is likely no connection between the two. Therefore, I suggest clarifying this matter explicity.
In section "Etymology and terminology", change "The term hamburger originally derives from Hamburg,[2] Germany's second-largest city. Hamburg was also one of the major ports through which German emigrants to the Americas left in the 19th century. Hamburger in German is the demonym of Hamburg, similar to frankfurter and wiener, names for other meat-based foods and demonyms of the cities of Frankfurt and Vienna (in German Wien) respectively." to "The term hamburger originally derives from the German city Hamburg; although there is no certain connection between the food and the city [2]." Ylchong (talk) 10:40, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
This edit requesttoHamburger has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Dotodoya (a youtuber) read the page and I would like to put in a section about him
"National" recognition in which nation? This line just assumes that the reader is an American national which is not the kind of language an encyclopaedia should use. Please change it to "national recognition in the US". 92.233.169.229 (talk) 11:12, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 18:25, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
– I think the common name is 'Burger' rather than 'Hamburger', so I propose renaming this article accordingly. A Google test shows 1.2 billion results for 'Burger', compared with only 0.625 billion results for 'Hamburger'. A big part of the lead carefully explains that 'burger' is the short term, and there are all the different types of burgers, all of which are commonly known as 'X burger' rather than 'X hamburger'. This is both due to more international usage ('hamburger' seems to be much more US-specific?), and confusion (does it have to include ham? for those, like myself until recently, that didn't realise that it's named after Hamburg). I think 'burger' is better according to the 'good Wikipedia article title characteristics', particularly recognisability (it's about burgers, not ham), and concision (removing three letters ;-) ). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:24, 13 August 2022 (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.
This edit requesttoHamburger has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In Pakistan, burgers are called "bun kebab", not shami burger. Irock792 (talk) 17:55, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
hamborgor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.230.226 (talk) 18:12, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
This edit requesttoHamburger has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please remove this phrase:
The book The Art of Cookery Made Plain and Easy by Hannah Glasse included a recipe in 1758
and add this one:
The 1758 edition of the book The Art of Cookery Made Plain and Easy by Hannah Glasse included a recipe
"included a recipe in 1758" makes it sound like a periodical ("the newspaper X mentioned Y in 1758"), not a simple book with multiple editions. 123.51.107.94 (talk) 03:12, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
This edit requesttoHamburger has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
According to Lord Ed Fryer the 3rd, Earl of Burgundy, a burger simply refers to the ground meat (of any source), shaped into a circular disc, and NOT any of the accompanying ingredients, such as the common bread roll, cheese, or lettuce. 103.210.154.182 (talk) 08:29, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or|ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the section History, the term『Rundstück warm』should link to the relevant English-language wikipedia article Rundstück warm. Lagustus (talk) 17:35, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Done PianoDan (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Smash burger has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 16 § Smash burger until a consensus is reached. BDD (talk) 19:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)