# Talk:BLT

I have never heard this before, is this an American thing? I like BLT and I am not allergic to red meat. Google can find no other references to this. Edward

me neither, jimfbleak 09:30 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)
I removed the sentence Edward 15:46, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Bacon (pork) is technically red meat. —jiy (talk) 07:06, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
No, Red and White meat are culinary definaintions and meat from pigs is White meat Dainamo (talk) 14:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Just a quick comment to say that BLT sandwiches in Britain are quite often served on wholemeal bread rather than white. Loganberry (Talk) 00:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Sadly to say, but here in America, most people tend to prefer the foods that are less natural. Take for example, all the fast food chains. In a highly populated city, it can almost be said that you'll never be more than a block away from fast food places. The low prices, the ease, and the marketing convince people to take the white bread over the whole wheat. 69.208.173.93 06:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
I just wanted to say that I can't believe this wasn't an article before and how glad I am that someone created it :) Isopropyl 04:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
At least in Britain, I've never heard of a BLT with cheese in it... Is this something special in the US (or elsewhere)? EAi 15:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
I've never heard of putting cheese on a BLT, seems like its a personal preference.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.238.174 (talk) 23:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC) 

I've been making or ordering BLTs for over fifty (50) years. Personally I prefer the bread toasted and I like both whole wheat and white, I just decide what I want at the time and Ive never been to a restaurant in the US where I have not been offered whole wheat. The person above in red is just passing along European propaganda about Americans.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.11.192 (talk) 14:43, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

 This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it.  Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed.  I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy.  In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed or you would like to help spread this message contact us on this page. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 03:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

This should be on Alton Brown's page, or on the Good Eats page.

In an episode of Good Eats, Alton Brown declared that a BLT is too difficult to eat as a sandwich, and constructed a salad of bacon, lettuce, cherry and grape tomatoes, and croutons with a vinaigrette dressing. He also dubbed it a TLB, claiming that the tomatoes are the real feature of the dish.
--Phant 04:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not convinced. Is there something you could cite to support this claim? Bigpeteb 04:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

They eat plenty of them in the US.  So whether it's a British sandwich or not it's also an American sandwich.  I'll look for any appropriate categories to add.  Wikidemo 23:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
The term BLT appears in US publications from the mid-1980s.  "I could make four BLT's from one slice" Philadelphia Inquirer 1986.  "The food is classic short-order fare... a BLT" LA Times 1986.  "Instead of cheeseburgers, they've gotten chicken sandwiches and a BLT" Chicago Tribune 1986.  Prior to that blt is an abbreviation of 'built' in property ads.  Capitalised it makes a brief appearance in 1983 as the official name for the US/French Battalion Landing Team (building) attacked in Lebanon. Hakluyt bean (talk) 04:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Okay, my vote is to keep this section. It is interesting and adds to the article. It's not just a random "Trivia" section in my oppinion, and lots of articles have "In Popular Culture" sections. Captain Phoebus 17:17, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I looked it over and don't see anything there that's terribly helpful or illustrative of the sandwich.  Nothing anyone needs to know to understand the subject.  Wikidemo 23:54, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

This could be included as a variant, it's essentially the same sandwich, just without the bacon. I will add it if there are no objections.--RLent (talk) 17:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Entire article was deleted and Pornographic links were put instead, by an anonymous user. Any admins please make note of this, and carry out ip-banning measures. The ip is 85.92.73.245 (talk) 18:46, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

The article mentions the BLT’s ordinal rank of popular sandwiches. If the BLT is second most popular, it would be helpful to say which sandwich beats it. For example, if someone were doing some research on what to put on a menu. Synetech (talk) 12:34, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

The source appears to be unreliable and has been tagged as such. I suggest deletion. I find it hard to believe that the peanut butter and jelly sandwich isn't more popular than both the BLT and ham sandwich in the US. Weetoddid (talk) 15:36, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Per WP:LEAD: "Abbreviations and acronyms are generally avoided unless the subject is almost exclusively known by its abbreviation (e.g. NATO and Laser)."
I know that the sandwich is most often referred to as a BLT, but that doesn't mean it's exclusively known as this. This article should, in my opinion, be called "Bacon, lettuce, and tomato sandwich". Anyone else have an opinion about this? DKqwerty (talk) 17:50, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Almost is an important qualifier. Where exactly does one draw the line between most often and almost exclusively? I say no move. -- Logotu (talk) 20:49, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

BLTs are the second most popular sandwich in the US after ham and cheese? Whoever wrote that is full of horse poop. Burgers are clearly also sandwiches (hence the original term, "Hamburger sandwich"), and anyone with common sense can tell that burgers are WAY more commonly eaten here than BLTs. Succubus MacAstaroth (talk) 20:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree. The book cited itself just cites one opinion: "according to restaurant critic John Mariani." Maybe this is regional, but where I live you hardly ever see a ham sandwich on a menu, anywhere. There shouldn't be any statement of what the most popular sandwich is without a citation backing it up with some kind of survey or poll. --Ericjs (talk) 19:57, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

I propose the article Bacon, Lettuce, and_Avocado be merged with this one. That article is short, the differences are insignificant. and I believe there is little room for development. Despite living in Philly, I've never even heard of the baseball playoff reference. 
Further, a surprising number of people probably stumble onto that page because it is the first disambiguation listing for the search query, "bla".
If we want to move this to the 'BLA'page, there needs to be a lot more done with that page to make it more informative.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DTBH (talk • contribs) 07:07, 16 August 2010 (UTC) 
I would prefer it be merged with bacon sandwich as it is a type of bacon sandwich not a variant of the BLT. Weetoddid (talk) 00:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the original proposer that it be merged into BLT (sandwich), it's more closely related. -- œ™ 03:30, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

The article does not say what the outcome was. Michael Hardy (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:BLT (sandwich)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Intelligentsium 02:28, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
I will review this article. It does not meet the quick-fail criteria, but in its current state I think there is a great chance it will not pass. 

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
You can't really push a POV about a sandwich.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

Comments
The article is short, but good articles of this length are not unheard of. I will review this article in depth over the next day or so, but here are some preliminary comments.

The article seems to go into too much detail about the recipe, almost to the point of being a recipe in itself
 Not done I have difficulty over this point. A BLT is Bacon, Lettuce and Tomato sandwich, and there's a lot of discussion over the recipe. I attempted to reduce it to the important points and not certain how much more it could be reduced.
Edward Lee needs to be disambiguated Done
The article should be expanded to contain the 'major aspects', especially the extremely short sections at the bottom
I've reorganised, so that it's a larger section at the bottom with subsections. Along with the removal of the Lina Morales I hope that improves things there. Still looking around for more popular culture references.
Recentism is relevant to the section #Lina Morales controversy; despite the 'controversy' occurring in 2004, it is not particularly relevant to the topic from an historical perspective. Please consider removal.
 Done I was iffy over this when I wrote it and since I couldn't find anything about the outcome it really does stink of recentism.
Some of the sources are not reliable, for example check 3, 4, 9, and 15. I also have qualms about using multiple cookbooks as sources.
Re: the cookbooks, there are 3 in there - two are actually more just cookbooks as they discuss the "lore" around bacon. The other one is a published source, which included a useful correlation between club sandwiches and BLTs. Now removed - found alternative.  Disagree with 3 not being reliable, when discussing a person's opinion, sourcing it from their blog does not seem unreasonable. 4 & 15 removed, no question. Still looking at 9, the food timeline. removed 9.
The sentence "The lettuce is used to counter-balance the texture of the bacon, giving an opposing feel and temperature" needs a source or it will risk seeming like original research. The same holds for the next sentence Done fixed I hope.
"Controversially, food writer Ed Levine..." - Why "controversially"?   Done "shocking"!
Under Variations, the relationship between " A club sandwich can be defined as a three-layered sandwich, where one layer is a BLT." and the previous sentence is unclear  Done new para + expansion.
Same section, "The BLT sandwich has also been deconstructed into a salad, a pie and a soup." is not sourced  Done removed until I can find some decent sources (more than just lots of examples!)
The statement: "In the 1903 Good Housekeeping Everyday Cook Book, a recipe for a club sandwich included bacon, lettuce, tomato, mayonnaise and a slice of turkey sandwiched between two slices of bread." (in History) is of unclear relation to the rest of the section. I suspect you mean to say that this may have been a predecessor to the BLT (supporting the assertion that "the club sandwich ... likely influenced the BLT's creation"), but in this case you have cited the cookbook directly, so to say this borders on original synthesis (unless the cookbook also says this explicitly, of course) no, you're right. fixed that.  Done
Under Popularity, the statement "The popularity of the BLT sandwich comes from its simplicity." is unsourced  Done removed
I would like to see some more examples of the "BLT in art" if possible. It can be changed to "BLT in popular culture" if necessary.  Done per above, with reorganisation. Hopefully it's acceptable, but not stricken just yet.
The subsections are so short that I think they can be merged into a single BLT in culture section. Intelligentsium 01:00, 12 February 2011 (UTC)  Done
The lede section might be expanded a bit  Done
Same for the Variations section
Difficult with the variations section as the page history attests to. For example, a "TLB" salad was vetoed previously, as was a BLO (bacon lettuce and onion) sandwich. I think that I could probably get a bit about the soup/salad/pie in there, but I haven't found any good reliable sources for them other than cookbooks.
"The bread can be of any variety ... but should be fresh" [emphasis mine]; this part doesn't seem to be in the source given. If you find a source I would recommend that you word it something like "but fresh bread is recommended by [so-and-so]" or better (if you can find a source) "but fresh bread is widely recommended". This is an instance where the article may cross into guidebook-territory; Wikipedia should not be telling the reader what s/he should do.  Done I re-read the sources and think I put my own POV in there. now removed.
Under Popularity, saying that the study "discovered" that people who prefer BLTs are conscientious perfectionists is an overstatement. There is an obvious conflict of interest (the study being commissioned by the company that makes a crucial ingredient in the sandwich), but even besides that you can't really tell anything about a person's personality from his or her sandwich preferences. It reminds me of the Chinese zodiac paper placemats I get when eating at a not-very-authentic Chinese restaurant; they tell you things about your personality based solely on your birth-year. Personal digressions aside, a less "definitive" wording should be used, because studies don't really "discover facts", they only support or contradict hypotheses. Done changed it down to suggested
I am vaguely uneasy about citing a campus newspaper (17), but it doesn't seem unreliable in itself. I remember one of our policies provided guidance on this specific respect but I have not been able to track it down.  Not done Having read some other articles, it didn't seem unreliable to me, but if concensus is against campus newspapers I can take it out.
"In 2003, the world's largest BLT was made by Michele Anna Jordan, measuring 108 feet (33 m) in length. It was prepared at a 2003 tomato festival in Sonoma County, California and had a total area of 14,976 square feet (1,391.3 m2)."; this sentence is uncited  Done Press Democrat source.
Under World record, the statement that "In 2003, the world's largest BLT was made..." seems incongruous with the rest of the section, which goes on to state that the record was broken. I would recommend changing it to emphasise that it was the world record at the time, but this particular phrase doesn't fit  DoneI think I've got this sorted now.
Under British politics, there is a lot of information that is not related to the BLT. "The article was summed up" is also a very awkward phrasing  Done partially. I'll think about whether to cut down the rest.
One (hopefully) final issue: you variously have "The bacon ... is the strongest flavour of the dish", "The lettuce is used to counter-balance the texture of the bacon", and "The tomato counter-balances the flavour of the bacon, adding sweetness to the bacon's saltiness", but none of these are cited
Overall, the main concern is length. I strongly urge you to expand this article to be more comprehensive. Intelligentsium 01:00, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look at the lead, see if I can expand that a bit more. As to concerns over length, I'm more worried about comprehensiveness - length in and of itself should be an issue. (Eg Tropical Depression Ten (2005) is a featured article which is only ~4000 chars in length!) I am not sure how much more information there is for expansion on BLT. WormTT 12:31, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I must say, this article has developed nicely. I'll give you a few days for any last minute expansion and tidying, but even without it the article could pass. Intelligentsium 18:15, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Really? Wow. I was just trying to get this to be as good as it can be, very pleased if that's the result. I've got another source which I'm hoping to put in regarding the BLT salad as a variation. May not get a chance to and I'm not sure how happy I am with the source (a NY times review of a book [1]). Oh and thank you very much for the copy edit WormTT 18:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Now added bacon salad variation... and I think I'm done! WormTT 13:53, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
I think you might have overlooked a small last comment I made (copied here). You variously have "The bacon ... is the strongest flavour of the dish", "The lettuce is used to counter-balance the texture of the bacon", and "The tomato counter-balances the flavour of the bacon, adding sweetness to the bacon's saltiness", but none of these are cited. This is not a minor issue so it should probably be addressed, at least as a formality, before I pass it. Intelligentsium 21:01, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Good point, I did overlook that. I'll have a look for sources tomorrow. I think the MSNBC article should cover it though, but will certainly check WormTT 21:50, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
I think I've fixed it, sourced that the bacon "carries" the other flavours and removed the other two comments WormTT 10:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Looks good, now I have no qualms about passing the article. Intelligentsium 22:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)


### Thanks
cheers for doing this. I was iffy about the good status, but I did thing it was close enough to be worth a shot. Even if it doesn't pass, your review will only help the article. No rush though, I don't edit much on the weekends so I am unlikely to put in any fixes before Monday :) Worm 08:07, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Regarding "Summer is traditionally a time when US consumers eat a lot of BLT" - now that we've went through the BRRD phase ;-) I'd posit that the statement isn't relevant as used anyway. The full quote is "There are several underlying reasons why pork prices might be high at the moment. (one such reason) Summer is traditionally a time when US consumers eat a lot of BLT – or bacon, lettuce and tomato – sandwiches, causing stockpiles of pork to fall." (emphasis and portion in parens are mine). Without more detail, it's simply a vague example of a possible cause with no indication given to the importance of that cause. So, quality of the cite aside, I don't see how/why such should be included in the article using that cite. It's (per its own wording) rather non-definitive and vague. Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 19:26, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm with that also.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the idea that U.S. sandwich eaters could drive up the price of pork at certain times of the year is a plainly extraordinary claim, and the Telegraph, which may be a fine source for most purposes, is not well known for its detailed and well-regarded analysis of porcine economics.  If the statement is to be included, I'd like to see something more firm, in terms of specific expertise in this area, simply because the claim is, on the face, so unusual and unlikely, it would require a higher level of support in terms of source material than most statements.  --Jayron32 19:48, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough - I can certainly see that point of view ... I'll have a look for something firmer. WormTT · (talk) 19:51, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I've got some additional thoughts. I believe the pork prices change is a given it seems. I am thinking, what's needed is an expansion on the statement (albeit also using other sources), such as (details fabricated): "Besides other factors, such as outbreaks of swine fluand pigs being used for florescent dye research, an increased consumption of BLTs has contributed to the stockpiles of pork to fall". So, my suggestion isn't just a stronger source or sources, but a better use of those sources as well. As much as I LOVE bacon[2], we of course can't create wording that overstates what effect people like me cause to the market. Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 19:57, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes, but we should be detailed in that case. Lets say (completely made up numbers) that U.S. BLT eaters account for 1% of the price change. What would that mean, and would it even be worth mentioning. The vague statement "besides other factors" doesn't indicate how much each factor counts, and if "other factors" account for 99% of the difference is MUCH different than if "other factors" account for, say, 60% of the difference. Even if we report the data (which I'm kinda 50/50 on at this point), we should provide a better level of detail than the vague statements currently proposed, which may lead the reader to draw the wrong conclusion about the magnitude of the effect (presuming it even exists, pending good sources which say it does). --Jayron32 20:01, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
It certainly does seem like we need something with hard evidence - mentioning the other factors. I expect if I find sufficient high quality information, it could well be incorporated to a few other articles. I've started a bit of research and might need to pop out to the library. May well take me a few days, but thanks for the pointers. WormTT · (talk) 20:33, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Just a quick look through some online sources do confirm the idea of seasonal bacon prices 

Bloomberg explains that the prices rise during the summer months, as it is tomato season and more people in the mid west eat BLTs.
The Guardian (for Prince Edward Island) also mentions it, but in less detail
Time magazine too mentions a link between tomato season and higher bacon sales.
Perhaps a rewrite of the sentence to say - The popularity of BLT sandwiches is shown by the seasonal high demand and consequential rise in price of bacon during the summer, a period which coincides with tomato season. - I'd appreciate any thoughts. WormTT · (talk) 21:15, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Interestingly, this theory has been around for a while. Mentioned in "Reading Eagle" in 1992 - and is even discussed as the "BLT factor" in two [3][4] text books which discuss trading in futures. Seems to be a relatively accepted fact. WormTT · (talk) 21:32, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Nobody denies that there are seasonal prices in bacon. That was not the claim you put on the Main Page or that appeared for months (surviving this article's GA review!).
This article stated that BLTs increased the price of pork---pork, not bacon. Yesterday, you reinserted the claim about pork prices into the article.   Kiefer.Wolfowitz 04:31, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
@WTT/David
I linked pork cycle yesterday on my RfA guide, which discusses the BLT DYK.
You are confusing a pork cycle with a bacon cycle, again: Your first sources were discussing pork cycles.  In economics, the traditional model appeared in a 1928 paper in Germany, which did not discuss the BLT-eating habits of American consumers,  which is noted in our article on pork cycle.  In economics, the pork cycle has been attributed to farmers raising more pigs when prices are high; the increased supply then decreases prices, which causes a decrease in pig production. In general, the hog cycle is not annual, because it is driven by farmers' adaptive behavior and constrained by the breeding abilities of pigs.   Kiefer.Wolfowitz 04:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm OK with citing the multiple sources, and not stretching the significance to more than the sources indicate. But it looks like this has been reported in multiple, reliable sources. --Jayron32 04:33, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Read what I wrote. Pork cycles are not bacon cycles. An adult pig has a fat layer of c. 6 inches around  him (castrated). Belly fat is only part of the products of a pig. (I thought I was a city boy.)  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 04:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, the first source clarifies how little of the pig is used in bacon. It discusses hog bellies, which can be frozen for the increased summer demand for bacon, not pork.  The GA status was granted and DYK appeared with the claim about pork prices! (That newspaper is unreliable.)  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 04:56, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Two issues 1) I don't see where the new sentence mentions it; the sources that WTT has provided indicate changes in bacon prices due to BLT consumption, and it is so referenced in multiple, reliable sources. I don't really see where what used to be written here matters at all, and the pork cycle isn't being mentioned in the new proposed sentence. 2) I have no idea how this text has anything at all to do with RFA and DYK... It seems completely nonsequitur to bring up unrelated and inconsequential matters of Wikipedia politics when discussing article text, and it would be nice if you could focus on the current text at hand, rather than trying to bring up unrelated matters for which I have no idea why it should matter.  --Jayron32 04:58, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
I wrote something similar below. But first we must stop the confusion of pork and bacon prices. Citing a futures-market theory textbook does not inspire confidence in me; they don't seem to cite any agricultural or econometric studies. (A partial-equilbrium analysis suggests some effect; a nontrivial/extraodinary effect is what has been suggested in this article.) You might ask for help at the economics WikiProject.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 05:16, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Kiefer, I am afraid we are crossing wires here.  I am still confused by the nature and cause of your objection.  I think I understand it a bit better, but it is still confusing to me what you are objecting to:
Do you object to the old text which mentioned pork cycles?  Or
Do you object to the new text which mentions bacon prices?
The new references provided above seem to indicate a BLT connection to bacon prices, and occur in multiple sources.  Could you explain what specifically you object to?  Is it something said in the source texts cited above which is incorrect, or what?  Details, and language, for people who are not agricultural economists would be helpful in explaining the problem.  I am not unintelligent, but I also don't know the jargon of that field all that well.  --Jayron32 05:24, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
I tried to focus discussion below. David's suggested language is an improvement, although I missed the green small print on first reading, and he then cited this hog cycle discussion.
If we focus on that suggestion, or what I wrote below, things will go better.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 05:35, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
OK, then could you propose an addition to the article based on the above sources?  All indicate an effect from BLTs, perhaps if you could propose something, we could have a way forward.  Like, some actual text you think needs to be added based on the above sources.  It needn't be a sentence or more, deep agri-economic theory is likely outside of the scope of this particular article, but a sentence or so which captures the essence of the conclusions of the above sources regarding the effect of BLTs on whatever it is they have an effect on.  --Jayron32 05:40, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
I think that we have consensus on some common-sense conclusions: That BLTs become more popular because of tomato season(s), exemplifying complementarity in consumption; if WTT still feels inspired, perhaps he can find an econometric study whose authors would let us plot time-series data on tomato & bacon prices? There may be a price-increase in bacon, whose estimated size should be stated, with a citation to a RS. (Partial-equilibrium discussions of toy problems, which are used to teach micro principles, should not be confused with empirical economics.) Frozen hog-bellies help meet the bacon demand. (We don't have any RS stating that BLTS influence hog prices, except negligibly.)
I would be happy to look at the article later. I don't have time to hunt for articles. (We are lucky that agricultural economics has long been the most empirical field of economics, at least until Swedes started using labor-market registers!) Kiefer.Wolfowitz 07:08, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Well this has been an interesting night on the talk page. I feel the sentence is necessary as it clearly demonstrates the popularity of the sandwich - to the extent that it directly affects the price of the commodity, bacon. I've found 4 reliable sources which demonstrate that, which I'm happy to weave into the "green" sentence. The other sources were more for the interest of the talk page readers, to show further that BLTs are considered in future trading and the theory has been arond for a while. I'm open to rewording the sentence further and would be interested in any other opinions on how it should fit neutrally into the article. I should point out that KW does not think very highly of me due to a recent RfC I had to start regarding his behaviour and that I personally doubt his good faith in this matter, so I would like to see more comments from other editors. WormTT · (talk) 08:53, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

WTT,
Regarding this article,  you should ask an economist for a graph to illustrate a plausible relation between bacon prices and tomato prices, if you wish to have this article satisfy the "appropriately illustrated" criterion of GA status. If you send me a file with the data, I can produce a graph for you.
Honestly, I never "thought very highly of" you, because I've read your articles and your discussions at the RfA. You might try to discuss "lowliness" with some Quakers or (but you had better hurry) some Shakers, if such worries be troublesome.
Since your partisan summoning by your friend at ANI, I have in fact had an accurate estimation of you. I predicted that you would run for ArbCom, simply because I have witnessed student-government politicians in action before, even after their glory days.
Sincerely  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 09:58, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Well, since this article is outside your normal area of interest and you so clearly editing it to take issue with me, my lack of good faith seems reasonable. I'm not interested in your opinion of me Kiefer.Wolfowitz, it matters not to me. Once this discussion is finished, I will happily go back to paying you no heed. I would like to see the information re-included in the article, and I would like to hear the views of editors who do not appear to be basing their opinion of the text on their opinion of me. WormTT · (talk) 10:16, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
WTT,
I caught your error, and have tried to find references for your assertion, and found none: Check the Google searches on the AC guide, if you want. I provided references to the pork cycle,  to help you. I've offered to create a graph for you, if you give me data.
To benchmark yourself, what have you ever done after attacking my edits at Penn Kemble, etc.? Nothing. And you complain that I'm personalizing this?
 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:29, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Just because you could not find references does not mean there are none, as I said this is not your area of expertise. In fact, it did not take me long to find 7 extra references which allude to this fact and I have no doubt there are more. There is no need for a graph, this article is about the sandwich and discussing the complicated cycles of agriculture stock markets should not be done here - it would be giving the topic undue weight. I have established that the popularity of the sandwiches is significant enough to cause a blip in the price of bacon during the tomato season, which should be sufficient for the sentence which I have suggested above. I'd understand and accept your view (you will note that I have not put the sentence back in), now I'd like to hear someone else.
Regarding Penn Kemble, wholly irrelevent to this discussion, please read what I wrote on your talk page a month ago, after which I removed your talk page from my watchlist. I've not interacted with you since. WormTT · (talk) 10:43, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Ok, then... back to the topic at hand. I see a lot of mention of pork bellies in the cites. While not perhaps common knowledge, bacon in the United States (which is where we are discussing for this tidbit) is pork belly derived.[5] Do we have to make a "US bacon is pork bellies" connection even though it is spelled out elsewhere? I'll be back in a bit... reading through the references posted here (and trying to finish some paying work). Best, ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 20:25, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
This article[6] even with some level of ambiguity, seems to mention most of what we are talking about. And when it comes to commodity trading, I'd posit that exact correlations aren't going to be found. The markets don't seem to work that way - which is the reason why various commodities can be artificially driven up by speculators. Nonetheless, such seems to usually be considered noteworthy even without tons of charts pointing out statistical correlations (that can't be made due to speculators artificially controlling prices). I'd say there is no onus on us to determine such reasons and motives when often, those who drive these markets, are never clear with their reasonings for doing such. Best, ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 20:30, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


### Suggested addition
I've written up my suggested addition to the popularity section. 

The popularity of BLT sandwiches in the USA is shown by the seasonal high demand and consequential rise in the price of bacon every summer, a period which coincides with tomato season. 

reading the discussion above, there does appear to be local consensus (with one editor objecting). I'd appreciate it if someone could add this sentance into the article, but if there's no objections in the next 24 hours, I'll do it myself. KW, if you still find this text significantly objectionable, let me know and I'll start up an RfC to get more eyes on the situation. WormTT · (talk) 11:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Support: The above sentence is directly supported by multiple, reliable sources.  The discussion about the mechanics of commodities trading and deep agronomical analysis steered this discussion well afield of the scope of this article, which is, after all, about a sandwich.  The above sentence appears, from the sources, to be factually correct and solidly verfiable through multiple reliable sources.  Good stuff.  --Jayron32 14:29, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Before voting, some discussion may be useful. Your text's style and its accuracy can be improved.
BLT sandwiches are  popular especially in the summer, following the tomato harvest. The BLT-season  is associated with an increase in the price of pork-bellies, which are processed into bacon. 

 Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Support that too.  --Jayron32 18:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Jayron, but we must choose one among them (or others). Do you agree that mine has better style and is more faithful to the sources?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:00, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
No need for rivalry here KW, your version incorporates all the information I would like to see in the article - I'm happy with that. And since there's no objections to it, would you like to put it in, or should I? WormTT · (talk) 19:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Why don't you go ahead. I would probably rewrite it again!  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 19:58, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Yeah for collaboration!  Wikipedia works!  --Jayron32 23:14, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

The DYK and GA issues can be discussed in other fora.Here, we should focus on fixing the article. 
This is the keypoint: 

Suppliers/Distributors freeze (how much) hog bellies.
Frozen hog bellies help to meet the increased demand for bacon, which used to occur with yearly tomato harvests.
At harvest time, tomato prices fall and tomato quality improves, and consumers would like to make BLTs.
BLTs have negligible impact on pork prices, and nobody seriously blames increased pork prices on BLTs. There may well be seasonalities in the bacon market; that is a separate issue than the DYK claim. The impact of hydroponics and international tomato production probably have reduced the (?) yearly tomato-driven jiggle in bacon prices.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 05:08, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, and the proposed re-addition above doesn't mention pork prices, only bacon prices, as do the refs, so I am uncertain why you are objecting to it at this juncture? --Jayron32 05:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Multiple statements confused bacon and pork, for example, e.g. WTT's citing the pork-cycle literature as evidence of a bacon cycle. As I wrote right above your  comment, it may be appropriate to discuss a bacon spike, if reliable sources can be found.  Agricultural-economics journals are more reliable than suburban weekly newspapers.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 05:22, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, this would be a nice example of complementary goods in consumer theory. But it seems that tomato harvests drive any cycle, if WTT's comment and my intuition agree with the truth. Maybe a LISREL path diagram model can be supplied?  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 05:24, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Could we keep this discussion together above.  I think we're bifurcating the discussion unecessarily here, and it is getting hard to keep it together.  --Jayron32 05:26, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Jayoon, WTT did cite a hog-cycle example immediately after the improved language, so I was trying to correct parts of your "the proposed re-addition above doesn't mention pork prices, only bacon prices, as do the refs"

Here's why.  Lengthy article, but I'm thinking BLT is an acronym for 'bacon lettuce tomato' and only appears where sandwiches containing predominately those ingredients are advertised for sale, for example on a menu, on the label of a sandwich wrapper, or in a newspaper advertisement.  Other than that, so far as I can tell, there is no canonical BLT, neither are there BLTs.  BLT is an acronym in a commercial context and relates to sandwiches.  A lot of the article seems to concern itself with different ways to make sandwiches containing bacon, lettuce and tomato.  All very yummy.  However, I think people were sticking bacon, lettuce and tomato between slices of bread long before someone in a hurry wrote BLT on a menu. Hakluyt bean (talk) 03:52, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

If you have other subjects which use the acronym BLT and need their own article, you could write them by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Disambiguation.  Articles are each supposed to be about a single subject, not every possible use of the title.  --Jayron32 04:28, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The reference link for the line about eggs goes to a one-sentence personal blog post. With no comments. It seems vastly insufficient to warrant being included in the article at all, let alone being portrayed as a matter of controversy. Gonna cut it. Spark240 (talk) 20:27, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

there is much mention of mayonnaise.  the first mention is that UK substituted a low fat mayo.  so it is inferred that indeed, a BLT has 5 ingredients, not just 4.

jmarcv  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.92.157.252 (talk) 01:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC) 

You are absolutely right, the mayonnaise was removed by an IP recently, I've replaced it. WormTT(talk) 07:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Is the "streaky" or "American style" bacon the standard, or is it subject to regional bacon variation such as "back" or "peameal" bacon?  Someone should probably add something on that if there is. -- 24.212.139.102 (talk) 22:27, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on BLT. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20151206000101/http://www.newstatesman.com/node/147687 to http://www.newstatesman.com/node/147687
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:34, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on BLT. 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/20110713203319/http://media.www.lhueagleye.com/media/storage/paper485/news/2009/11/05/News/Bentley.Cooks.Up.World.Record.Blt-3824011.shtml to http://media.www.lhueagleye.com/media/storage/paper485/news/2009/11/05/News/Bentley.Cooks.Up.World.Record.Blt-3824011.shtml
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: 5 June 2024).

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) 10:32, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

I was surprised to see the suggestion here that BLTs may be toasted sandwiches. I have always known them as being on a fresh role, or even an un-toasted sandwich. Who the hell wants toasted lettuce, anyway. In Ireland, I have several times been given a "toasted BLT" that appears to have some horrid green slime inside that was probably once lettuce. TonyP (talk) 13:37, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Have any other sources ever reported that Tony Blair's choice of BLT as his favorite sandwich "is loaded with political symbolism" Is the source enough for content about a living politician? I'm leaning towards removing this as non-encyclopedic gossipy trivia. Spudlace (talk) 04:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

What's the abbreviation to that? Alexkrzywicki1 (talk) 17:54, 20 August 2022 (UTC)