Talk:Maple syrup

message: The 'manual' has been used as a source for over 20 citations (#s 10, 18, 25, 26, 27, 48, 49, 52, and 82). They all link to the following site (https://web.archive.org/web/20160924094635/http://estore.osu-extension.org/cw_Search.aspx?k=maple), except for # 49 which I just added today. The one I added is a full online PDF version (https://holmes.osu.edu/sites/holmes/files/imce/Program_Pages/Maple/North%20American%20Maple%20Syrup%20Producers%20Manual%20full%20pdf.pdf) from Ohio State University (osu). In the next few days, I plan on updating all of them to point to the PDF version. Absolutely Certainly (talk) 23:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usage of 'North American Maple Syrup Producers Manual' as a source in this article. 

message: The third paragraph of the lead is contradicted by the information in the section /* Grades */ Absolutely Certainly (talk) 22:36, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grading 

message: There is disagreement whether to include a sentence about an abolitionist named Lucretia Mott who, as part of avoiding any slave-made products such as sugar cane, distributed maple-flavored candies with the tag "“Take this, my friend, you need not fear to eat. No slave hath toiled to cultivate this sweet.” It is discussed in a Nation magazine profile of her work. I think this is an interesting and insightful item but another editor feels it's not of sufficient importance for this article, since the use of maple by abolitionists is already mentioned. After bouncing back and forth, does anybody else have an opinion? - DavidWBrooks (talk) 16:14, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I say: include it.  It's a factoid that makes clear the relevancy of maple syrup to the abolitionist issue, rather than only a bald statement to that effect.Smallchief (talk) 18:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It cannot do so, because it is not about maple syrup at all - it's about maple sugar. It may be relevant to that article assuming it is accurate - there seems to be some disagreement on details in sources, and the source in use here is not one that seems reliable for historical studies - but not here, even leaving aside issues of due weight. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The previous sentence in the article mentions maple sugar. However, that is a good point - Mott wasn't handing out containers of maple syrup. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree .....should move info to Maple sugar. Moxy- 14:25, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no objection to that. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:05, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maple syrup in abolution use 

message: Hi all, I'm wondering if this article would be suitable for Today's Featured Article on the Main Page in October of this year or next year. I mentioned the article as a possibility at WT:TFA, and one person said that it looks "rough". Thoughts? I have no objection to some kind of formal article-vetting process at WP:URFA or elsewhere if that's needed, but I see a lot of conscientious editors in the edit history ... so, I'll leave it up to you folks. - Dank (push to talk) 22:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What were your specific concerns? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:17, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Nikki, good to see you. Btw, apologies, I had it on my to-do list to make this post asking about a possible TFA rerun, but it didn't get done until yesterday ... oops. I really like this article and I think it would be good for October, but there's no rush ... next October would work just as well, if anyone wants more time to work on it. - Dank (push to talk) 17:21, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

text: I just got a request to move this TFA rerun to July 1 or July 2 ... works for me, but I'm open to other ideas. - Dank (push to talk) 15:26, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  TFA?