Talk:Spelt

message: Spelt is also sometimes used in the English lanuage to denote the 'past tense' of spell (vis: He spelt it wrong.)
:I agree.  Just my opinion, I don't think that takes more than your mention here.
:It's an incorrect usage. It should be mentioned in the article.Methulah 06:47, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "It's an incorrect usage"- Wrong. American English is not the only way of spelling words (even if your spell-checker assumes otherwise). Spelled is American, spelt is British, simple as that. And I don't believe it needs mention in the article, since there is an article on English spelling variants anyway.99.251.230.51 (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

text: This spelt (wheat) is often called speltz or spelts in English.  I think that redirect entries should be entered for them.  If someone agrees, maybe they could be added.  Or if you disagree, discuss it. Gene Nygaard 12:38, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: Thanks for this! Glad the page supports the FDA view.Mark Nesbitt 20:54, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling

message: To use the the word 'spelt' in the following sentence is NOT proper usage in the English language: He spelt it wrong. --Brokenbones 03:36, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's considered acceptable in BrE I'm afraid. Liam Markham (talk) 02:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

text: It's not only considered acceptable, but in most — if not all — versions of English outside the US it is considered the preferable past participle of the word 'spell'. The first comment in this thread just shows an ignorance to other variants of English outside the US. --124.180.168.76 (talk) 06:00, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  spelt 

message: The following italicised edit was removed from the Nutrition section as it was added without stating sources:
As it contains a moderate amount of gluten, it is suitable for baking bread with yeast, although, as it has less gluten than wheat, it gives a less successful rise to the loaf. The gluten in spelt is also more fragile than in wheat, which means that the dough may collapse if kneaded for too long.
--apers0n 20:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing unsourced material 

message: I added the bit about Spelt pasta, it is becoming popular in specialty stores.  Joezasada 01:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you give some evidence for the statement "is almost always of high quality (probably due to the limited production)"? --apers0n 09:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  spelt products 

message: The "Evolution" section says that spelt is the ancestor to bread wheat.  The "Early history" says that spelt is a hybrid of bread wheat and emmer wheat.  One of those two must be wrong. Bhudson 02:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have had a go at making the story clearer. Spelt must have been an ancestor of bread wheat, but bread wheat could (and likely was) an ancestor of the European form of spelt several thousand years later.Mark Nesbitt 19:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelt origins 

message: The Products section states: 
"The raw grain when chewed releases trace amounts of gluten giving the mass a slight resilience, not unlike gum (whereas wheat becomes a sticky glutinous mass, similar to thick jam)."
I have chewed both wheat and spelt and they turn into a chewing gum that last as long as you want to chew it; it is like regular chewing gum but not quite as sticky. Spelt is softer than wheat but both are hard and may need a little soaking in the mouth or in water to facilitate chewing. At first it is a little mealy but it gradually turns into chewing gum. What kind of citation do you want? Try it and see for yourself or you can cite me.
Dab295, 22 July 2008
:See Wikipedia:Reliable sources. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 17:13, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Products 

message: There is currently no evidence that those with wheat allergy can eat spelt. Moreover, there is poor evidence that a pathological wheat allergy, other than coeliac disease, exists other than extremely rare circumstances. Coeliac disease sufferers should not eat spelt. Newspaper articles and unrelated evidence should not be cited as truth. 86.136.48.90 (talk) 16:40, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wheat allergy 

message: We often have the situation where there is no really appropriate illustration on Commons. Here, the illustration of a spelt loaf is definitely not appropriate for the kind of spelt loaves sold in England. It is obviously a much heavier and (looks like) malt-laden type of spelt, called Essene bread, made in Germany. I have dithered a bit between alternatives  and , Neither is quite right for an English spelt loaf, but at any rate better than Essen bread. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:29, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suitability of illustrations 

message: , please explain this revert. Also, in the future immediate support of allegations of error on the talk page would be appreciated, as these types of actions without a clear basis harms our growth by damaging people's experience with Wikipedia. Disclosure: I helped a newbie make this as their first edit. Happy to swap it in for a different source if you have information which contradicts Don Stinchcomb. This is not the type of information we would expect to be documented in a scientific article, but perhaps in a trade magazine. II | (t - c) 04:28, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The edit didn't add improved information, but rather provided questionably sourced information compared to the previous version. WholeFoods is not a good WP:SECONDARY source because WF is selling a product and doesn't provide the specific source for a given comment -- better to research and use the WF article sources, rather than the article itself. Further, the edit was incorrectly written ("...lost popularity in part it has..." missing "because") and introduced an uncommon vague term - "free threshing" - which was confusing and unconstructive for the general user. Having an edit reverted should mean a better edit - content with solid source - is needed. --Zefr (talk) 13:47, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elaboration on revert and lost popularity 

message: It's fairly common knowledge spelt has a reputation as a health food and this is indeed mentioned twice in the article, however, I can find nothing about why it is a health food and if there is any scientific basis for this claim.
Based on this (see reference) article it seems the claims are mostly not true, only since it's, so far, less popular than normal wheat it has been less cultivated and because of that it contains more protein compared to normal modern wheat.
Does anyone have an English sourced reliable article as reference?
NicoLaan (talk) 12:46, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Health food 

message: POWO is a definitive source for plant names. They say it is Triticum aestivum subsp. spelta. That name must be included if WP is not to appear out of date. DCDuring (talk) 17:19, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plants of the World Online disagrees