Talk:Cast-iron cookware

message: I've rolled in the following other wikipedia pages: 
* the paragraph about cookware from the Cast iron page (removed from source)
* the entire entry for seasoning (cast iron) (original page still there) 
* the entire entry for enameled cast iron (original page still there).
FiveRings 22:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved sections 

message: sounds like a great idea. FiveRings 05:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: After merging it would be good to make the related pages be redirects to the relevent sections of Cast iron cookware. --Midnightcomm 16:33, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea.  Not sure I'll have time to do this this week. FiveRings 01:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  merging seasoning (cast iron) 

message: Wikipedia is not an instruction manual.  Unless there are objections, I shall remove all procedural material in the article in a week. --Perfecto  19:29, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I object.  The best way to describe what "seasoning" is is to explain how to do it. 05:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I also object.  The article is pointless otherwise.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.206.173 (talk) 00:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not an instruction manual 

message: I sent email to them a few weeks ago asking if they were still in business, and recieved a surprised reply claiming that they were.
On the other hand, my order still hasn't arrived. Once it does, I'll update the listing. FiveRings 23:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wagnerware 

message: Absolutely no way.  Thousands, perhaps, but not millions.  Anatomically modern humans have only been on the planet for a hundred thousand-ish years.--Stevewylie 05:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Millions of years? 

message: I bought an enameled cast-iron frying pan from Ikea, then instructions don't say anything about not scrubbing it with a rough sponge or steel-wool or anything like that, they just say to hand-wash it... I was wondering if enamel would be damaged if i use a rough sponge (not necessarily steel wool, but a slightly abrasive one. Spindled 21:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Le Creuset specifically says no abrasives (recommends bon ami). I don't know about Ikea - they may use a different coating. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FiveRings (talk • contribs) 02:42, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Enameled Cast-iron cookware question

message: While useful, Wikipedia is not a how-to guide... I would suggest that teh "how to season" a pan qualifies as a how-to instruction that doesn't belong in the article TheHYPO (talk) 09:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We've discussed this before. The easiest way to describe what seasoning IS is to describe how its done. (There used to be four or five techniques, it's been cut down). FiveRings (talk) 21:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That may be, and I appreciate that it has improved, but it's not enough to say "it's better than it was" as a rationale for keeping it. It's not just that section, The cleaning reads as a guide as well, but the seasoning is the worst. In fact, reading it over, the techniques don't need any rewriting;they just need to be axed. They add nothing to the explaination of what seasoning is or why it's done and are literally how-to guides on doing it. That's not for wikipedia. I'm axing the two techniques TheHYPO (talk) 01:59, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  seasoning; 

message: The lead for this article needs some improvement. I tried to fix it a bit, but it needs something better. It used to say "cast iron cookware is cookware made out of cast iron"... that was just awful writing; I'm trying to figure out a better way to get the "cookware" and "cast iron" into the lead as near to the begining as possible for the links to those terms, because MOS says not to link the bold mention of the title.
I've moved the one-sentence brand section up there, since it will add to the lead, and kill a one-sentence section at the same time. I think the lead needs to be a bit longer though, such as explaining the common benefits and uses of cast iron, and perhaps its detriments and when it should not be used... something to give a reader an overview of what cast iron could possibly be the appropriate cookware for... TheHYPO (talk) 04:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The brands you put into the lead were for bare cast iron, not all cast iron. Did some more moving around. The one sentence brands section will grow as soon as I get a good picture of my Griswold pan. FiveRings (talk) 04:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why is it awful writing to say "cast iron cookware is cookware made out of cast iron"?  That's what cast iron cookware is.  If you think it's obvious, then maybe we shouldn't even have that sentence; we can just wikilink the terms in the subsequent lines.   MisterSheik (talk) 10:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Cast Iron Cookware" isn't a title... it's a description - "cast iron cookware" is only the title of the article because it is cookware that is made of cast iron - it is not the "title" of the product. As such, saying that "cast iron cookware is cookware made of cast iron" is repetitive. It's like saying "two-wheeled bicycles are bicycles with two wheels" - or "lead pipes are pipes made of lead" or "Pink Cadillacs are Cadillacs that are pink".  Since "Cast iron cookware is the description of what the item is, there shouldn't be a sentence like that. I'm just not sure what it should be. I don't think it's contraversial to suggest cast iron is a common cookware material - It is available in most stores and is hardly a rarely used cookware metal. Either way, I don't know what the first sentence should read, but what is there is not great. TheHYPO (talk) 10:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with that.  MisterSheik (talk) 10:37, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead work 

message: I'm not going to delete it because it's better than nothing, and I don't think the fact is likely false, but citing "experts say" off a site run by a guy and his wife is not necessarily qualifying for wikipedia realiable sources. Just any ol' website is not a citable source on wikipedia (wp:RS) -I'd think that site would fall under self-published sources. I'd at least like to remove the phrase "expert" as there is no evidence that this self-published technique stems from any expertese.
My bias would be that with this many unique versions of "how to season", there should be no "experts say" unless 99% of all methods suggest this, or someone with an actual authority can be cited as suggesting it. Thoughts? TheHYPO (talk) 22:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  Also, I wanted to say to you all (FiveRings, TheHypo, and HelloAnnYong) that I think this article is really improving. MisterSheik (talk) 00:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Aw shucks.  I put in the Louisiana cooking link because it mentions the "pores" thing high up in the text. I can probably find dozens of other links that reference the same belief. I'm fine with taking out the "experts" wording. FiveRings (talk) 02:11, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quality of sources. 

message: http://www.cookingincastiron.com/ should not be allowed onto the external links section. First,  is clearly a conflict of interest in this case, seeing as how Rick Mansfield is the first name listed. Next, per WP:ELNO #11, "Links to blogs and personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority" should not be included. The site claims no authority aside from being a bunch of people who happen to use cast iron, so there's no reason to include there. Finally, #10 on the same page, "Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups)" - the website is a forum of sorts, seeing as how there's a link at the top that says Discussions, which links to a Yahoo group. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 15:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please accept my apologies then. Obviously I am not up on all the Wikipedia rules, but should have been before I contributed. We had created the new site for cast iron, which is a bit different from some of the other sites that I've seen as it is an ongoing series of articles by a panel of contributors, and I thought it would be appropriate and helpful to list with the cast iron cookware article on Wikipedia as an external link. Evidently not. Again, there was no malice or ill will in my adding it to the list of external links. And also accept my apology if I'm not adding this comment in the correct manner. --Rfmansfield  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rfmansfield (talk • contribs) 15:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a shame about the rules in this case because http://www.cookingincastiron.com/ is probably the most informative and thorough site dedicated to cast iron that I've ever looked over. Slinkybinky (talk) 19:26, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of cookingincastiron.com 

message: "Manufacturers of enameled cast iron cookware include Le Creuset, Lodge, Staub, Descoware, and John Wright. Several newer brands are associated with well-known celebrities and chefs, including Daniel Boulud Kitchen, Martha Stewart (sold by Kmart and other retailers), Rachael Ray Cookware (made by Analon), and Mario Batali (made by Copco)."
This part seems to me like advertising. Sure, there are different brands mentioned, but is it really necessary to mention any at all? -- Nillli (talk) 09:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is somewhat. If you read above, though, there was a little battle over it, and the resolution was to just list them. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 13:09, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've just read the article and had the same thought: "What? Are they advertising some brands or what?", because obviously there are other brands apart from the ones mentioned. So why aren't those listed? Why are just those few brands listed? And looking at the answer above... I couldn't find anything about "advertise" in this page, just 1 irrelevant sentence. So I guess this issue is still open. -- Anonymous Anonymatus  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.1.52.36 (talk) 20:35, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What I threatened to do in the previous discussion was to put in a section on "historical and collectible" cast iron. Never got to it. But the point was that Lodge, Wagner, and Griswold were notable because they were (and are) US made and the earliest and longest lasting brands (as in more than 100 years). Lodge was the *only* US-made brand for a very long time, though Wagner is trying to jump-start production again. The enameled brands got added in as an attempt to document manufacturing location - there aren't really that many well-established brands of enameled cast iron, for example, but there are many crappy knock-offs that are made in China. (I should just take a few pics of the old Griswold and Wagner logos and write up the section). FiveRings (talk) 05:53, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advertising? 

message: If "people with hemochromatosis may suffer negative effects" (cited) then "non-toxic" (not cited) appears out of place, especially in the lead. Doesn't impart real information, in my opinion. I'd like to remove it. For now I'm going to add a citation needed tag. -Shootbamboo (talk) 01:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed. -Shootbamboo (talk) 23:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The lead has been expanded to differentiate between copper and iron (for the purposes of toxicity). This information is interesting, but it doesn't follow WP:LEAD in summarizing the article's content, so I propose that it should be moved down into the article (citations would be nice of course too). -Shootbamboo (talk) 03:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Non-toxic" and "may suffer negative effects" 

message: Maybe the article should mention the dangers of cast-iron cookware, like how the handle is roughly the same temperature as the rest of the pan (unlike most modern cookware) and about how since they're very good at retaining heat its very hard to tell how hot the handle is until you've touched it.--Craigboy (talk) 21:39, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Danger 

message: I removed the following assertion from the article: "Enameled cast iron pans are much more common in modern households than bare cast iron pans." The very recent addition to the article was not cited. Because the claim states plainly that enameled cast iron is "MUCH MORE COMMON" than "BARE" or "TRADITIONAL" cast iron, I removed it immediately since there was no citation. In terms of skillets this claim is highly unlikely. And though it is likely that "modern households" are likely to have a single 10" or 12" traditional cast iron skillet than any other type of cast iron, I decided to place this entry here for further discussion. A modern household may be more likely to have an enameled cast iron DUTCH oven than a traditional bare cast iron DUTCH oven, but it is doubtful that MORE households will have enameled ware over the old style skillets. These black cast iron skillets were made famous by Griswold and Wagner and continue to be sold in significant numbers by the Lodge Corporation in many outlets throughout the land, not the least of which are Walmart and Target for something like $20 each. Enameled items by Le Creuset are usually well over $100 (I have a 12" that is over $150) even when they are available at Costco and knock offs at Costco or other retailers are sold at a much higher price point than the 12" Lodge bare iron pan at $20 or $22. In any case, though the edit was well intended, with enamel cast iron newer to scene (since the mid 20th century) and the cost considerably higher than those skillets our grandmothers bought and many of us still have AND the Lodge skillets in ACE hardware stores everywhere, I was incredulous at the claim. The Wiki will need a citation to return this claim to the article. Regards, Norcalal (talk) 07:01, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are enameled cast iron pans much more common in modern households than bare cast iron pans? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Cast-iron cookware. 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/20130512045102/http://www.lodgemfg.com:80/useandcare/seasoned-cast-iron to http://www.lodgemfg.com/useandcare/seasoned-cast-iron
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:11, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I removed this text, and now see that it was inserted during the discussion immediately above:
I know what was meant, unfortunately what it actually says is wrong.  
* The walls and handles will always be cooler than the base if it is over a burner, especially handles which have a high surface area to volume ratio. 
* Yes they may well still be hot enough to burn you badly.
* Nothing 'holds it's temperature for a long time'.  Everything starts cooling immediately a heat source is removed. 
I'll try and draft something better.  Just wanted to explain why I removed it first. 
All the best: Rich Farmbrough  (the apparently calm and reasonable) 21:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed (uncited) text

message: We don't seem to cover this issue well in any one article and I've received a suggestion and some some sources here: Talk:Lucky iron fish#Discussion of cast iron harm and benefit. Please use them in this article if it's a good idea. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 10:15, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast iron as a source of nutritional iron