Talk:Angostura bitters

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) 15:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: There seems to be some confusion both here and in the House of Angostura article over whether "Angostura bitters" is generic or a particular company's product. I've gone with what the References say and modified the article to say that it's a product of House of Angostura. I haven't been able to find anything that says there is such a thing as generic "angostura bitters." If there is, we need to remove the part about only five people knowing the formula, and probably name some of the other producers. Discussion and further info welcome. Rees11 (talk) 20:19, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a plant called "angostura" which has bitter-tasting bark.  Angostura Bitters, the trademarked product, do not contain this plant.  However, many other brands of bitters are flavoured with the bark of the angostura plant, and may mention that fact prominently on the label - quite possibly for deliberate confusion with Angostura Bitters.  Thus it's possible that someone could use "angostura bitters" to refer to bitters flavoured with angostura rather than to Angostura Bitters from the House of Angostura.  You can verify this stuff by consulting any popular Web site on the subject of cocktail-mixing; I'm not sure how best to explain it in the article, or whether we should. 69.63.48.82 (talk) 13:43, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Generic vs Trademarked 

message: I know the reference says the only ingredient listed on the label is gentian, but here in the US that's not true. The label lists water, alcohol, gentian, and vegetable flavors and extracts. Maybe we need a better reference? Rees11 (talk) 15:47, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ingredients 

message: I just reverted an edit that deleted the comment about angostura bitters being recognised as an alcoholic beverage in the u.k. I've been hard pressed to actually find documentation on the British law relating to this on the internet, but numerous webistes that talk about angosturas mention this fact, and it stems from similar laws around the world that say it is not fit for beverage purposes. Other than that I am aware that it is sold in supermarkets without an age limit. If someone would like to change this edit back, could they please provide evidence that it is subject to alcohol laws in the u.k. first.
http://www.martiniguide.net/angostura-bitters.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quoth 31 (talk • contribs) 13:12, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Considered an alcoholic beverage 

message: This section is completely unsourced and unencyclopedically written. 94.116.11.109 (talk) 22:23, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Source added, not cleaned up though. Pol098 (talk) 22:05, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: How's this? Just the facts, less conversational tone. I was torn on including that last sentence; thoughts? Uberhill 05:01, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bitters Shortage of 2009 section 

message: Fixed it.
71.139.171.89 (talk) 04:06, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  acquired was misspelled 

message: "Angostura bitters is often incorrectly believed to have poisonous qualities because it is associated with Angostura bark (although it does not actually contain any)".  But how can a drink which contains over 40% alcohol be considered non-toxic?  Pehaps the sentence could be formulated as "Angostura bitters is often incorrectly believed to contain the poisonous Angostura bark, but does not contain any." ?  76.10.128.192 (talk) 00:04, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Part of the reason the sentence is structure that way is because not only is the belief that it contains the bark is mistaken, but so is the idea that the bark is poisonous. Steven Walling • talk  21:55, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious related to toxicity 

message: How can you state this as though it were universal?  I will change it to "may be an acquired taste."  Kostaki mou (talk) 18:05, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "are an acquired taste" 

message: This is not the only English pronunciation.  Many would pronounce the t as in stone (without the y glide) afterwards.  I tried to indicate this alternative, but couldn't figure out how.  Would someone else oblige?  Thanks.  Kostaki mou (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  English pronunciation 

message: Angostura bitters are alleged to have restorative properties.
In actual fact (though I do not at present have a textual reference for this) I happen to know Angostura Bitters were used by the Royal Navy in pink gin as a cure for seasickness.
Perhaps a kindly Wikipedian scholar with no private life might like to source a textual reference to this effect.
Nuttyskin (talk) 20:36, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medicinal 

message: The word was used as singular in some cases and plural in others.  I converted the latter to singular, because despite the ending, the word is used in a singular sense.  2603:8080:B200:5CDE:D1A3:983A:EE67:FA1D (talk) 19:08, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Bitters"