Talk:Muesli

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  banner as it falls under :Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 10:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: OED draft revision gives m(j)uːzli for the British pronunciation, or U.S. mjuːzli. The yodless pronunciation is certainly very common in the UK. Will edit appropriately. --Che Gannarelli (talk) 14:02, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've simply gone for '(j)'. I felt it unimportant to explicitly state that the yod is always pronounced in the U.S. No objection if anyone changes this, though. --Che Gannarelli (talk) 14:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: I have removed this seciton.  Here is the explanation.  First, the inclusion of a lengthy section on "customized" muesli is out of proportion with the significance of the concept.  The proportion of "customized muesli" to overall muesli consumption is surely miniscule, and the significance of the listed companies' services to the essential subject of the article is minimal at best.
Second, the section read like advertising copy:  the frequent (unsupported) claims that the companies' products are healthier than pre-packaged muesli, the assertion that "[t]he best taste of customised muesli is achieved if mixed with milk or plain yogurt", etc.
For what it's worth, I would have thought that somebody wanting "customized" muesli could mix it up himself (how hard can it be?) rather than ordering breakfast cereal by courier.
--anonymous cereal guy  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.109.160.198 (talk) 17:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of "Customised Muesli" section

message: I noticed from trying this, that it's like pouring cold milk on uncooked raw rolled oats or other porridge grains without 'cooking'/steeping with boiling or hot water. 
It seems that using either hot water/milk or cold steeping would be healthier and more palatable. B137 (talk) 23:44, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Making hot as oatmeal/porridge vs cold steeping overnight 

message: I'm gonna invoke 3RR and suggest that one user in particular stop silently reverting the constructive edit on the main advocates of Muesli. 
If this user has beef, he must state it clearly in Talk.
There's absolutely no reason for the non-inclusion of this section
Ieu1ogy (talk) 22:42, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Warring 

message: Can editor ZH8000 please explain why he is repeatedly erasing "toasted" from this article because of WP:SOAP. The link is to a very long policy so please explain how it applies to the edits you made to remove basic information that oats are toasted? Not all muesli is packaged. Muesli is made in the home by first toasting oats... why does WP:SOAP allow for removal of such basic facts?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nemo230 (talk • contribs) 21:25, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: What exactly do you mean by "toasted"? Here in Australia, toasted muesli is what Americans (to the best of my knowledge) would call granola, and home-made muesli uses rolled oats without any further cooking. Meticulo (talk) 15:21, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed, and the oats don't have to be soaked. Kdammers (talk) 15:53, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of toasted 

message: Hi. I've rewritten some of my recent edits after you deleted them. Please have a look at the article and see what you think. (I decided to try the bold, refine method rather than the BRD cycle). Some points:
* Modern variants: I've created a seperate subsection and rewritten this material in an effort to spell out what's happening - that cafes in English-speaking countries have a dish called 'bircher muesli' on their menus but it's not the original recipe.
* Cultural connotations: I agree with your edit summary that such details don't necessarily belong in the history section. (Any chance you could add something to this section? Perhaps citing sources with perspectives from the homeland of muesli, and elsewhere in continental Europe, so the section is not entirely anglophone and derogatory.)
* Templates for 'Fresh' and 'Prepackaged' sections: I'm not planning to delete anything from these, just thought I'd signpost them. Also, I've added a passage about home cooks premixing dry ingredients, which is also without citations but perhaps needed for clarification if the section is to stand. I'm happy for you to delete this, and may do so myself if I can't find sources.
Thanks, Meticulo (talk) 13:50, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Refining edits

message: I seem to be getting into an edit dispute with User:Johnbod. He has inserted "often in English museli" into the article, citing websites that spell the word as "museli". I, on the other hand, don't think this is a spelling variation, but simply a typographical error. One of the websites Johnbod cites isn't even consistent in the spelling, it uses "museli" first but "muesli" later. I would like this matter to be settled. Is "museli" really a spelling variation or just a typographical error? JIP | Talk 00:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it's a spelling mistake, in some cases a typo and possibly in others spelled deliberately that way, but incorrectly. I looked at various dictionaries and 'museli' isn't mentioned in any of them as a legitimate variant spelling of 'muesli'. In other words it is just incorrect (according to current thinking) and therefore it should not be mentioned on the page in my opinion. Dubmill (talk) 00:56, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Dictionaries may be slow to update but they should still be respected. While it may be easy to find instances of this spelling mistake if you go looking for it, that doesn't mean it's a widespread usage that's about to enter the dictionary. For what it's worth, I'd never seen it spelled 'museli' until yesterday, which leads me to believe that it is spelled 'muesli' in the vast majority of cases. I think it is misleading to suggest that it is routinely or commonly spelled 'museli' in English. Also, there are other ways it could be and is spelled wrongly, so are you going to mention that it is sometimes spelled 'meusli' in English? Dubmill (talk) 13:18, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a word one often sees spelled at all, outside a supermarket (or I suppose recipe book, but not in my case).  I've never knowingly seen 'meusli'  (nor for that matter the various continental spellings in the article). Johnbod (talk) 14:50, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I, on the other hand, have usually seen it spelled "mysli" or "müsli". I suppose "muesli" is the accepted spelling in English though. JIP | Talk 15:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never seen 'meusli' before either, but I thought I'd search for it, and in fact there are websites (as with 'museli', mainly blogs and cookery or food interest websites) where that spelling is occasionally used. I've certainly never seen anything other than 'muesli' on British food product packaging, and I eat various mass-produced versions of the food a lot so I would notice. Muesli used to be, and maybe to a degree still is, popularly associated in Britain with a certain kind of person, and there are newspaper and magazine articles that mention it for this reason. Once again, I only recall 'muesli' being used. That's why I was surprised to see this issue cropping up yesterday. Dubmill (talk) 15:24, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: These variations are just spelling mistakes by illiterates. --Ef80 (talk) 09:23, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Museli"