Jump to content

Talk:Affogato

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Untitled

[edit]

Can someone explain to me why the phodtos were deleted? They were great examples of how to make an affogato, and I had permission to use them... 24.131.241.73 18:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)Anigrrl[reply]

Anigrrl: see the log for Affogato_pour.jpg and Affogato_done.jpg. You'll see they were deleted because the licence was considered inappropriate. I think the problem is that there are likely to be free (public domain) images available. Re-adding the images with more information on why they aren't replaceable would help. - Mark 87.114.1.169 (talk) 14:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 September 2020 and 11 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Elizabethpopoff. Peer reviewers: Iriszhou99.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Espresso

[edit]

That doesn't look espresso based on the complete lack of crema. I'll have a look for a better photo. Efficacious (talk) 11:28, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

[edit]

AFAIK an affogato is a dessert(!) rather than a beverage. At least so it says in the german wiki. regards Jet.Bradley (talk) 18:00, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research Re: Las Vegas

[edit]

The article contains a claim that the affogato was created in Las Vegas by William Reed at Cipriani’s but Cipriani did not open until 2018 in Las Vegas, see 4 Things You Need to Know About the Newly Opened Cipriani at The Wynn Giuseppe Cipriani opened Harry's Bar in Venice in 1931. The restaurant chain claims that is the origin of Cipriani, see Cipriani - History. No document cited in the WP affogato article page supports the statement that the affogato was created in Las Vegas by William Reed at Cipriani’s. Phedrence (talk) 13:32, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The claim was removed. Phedrence (talk) 11:59, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why ignore the MOS?

[edit]

@JacktheBrown: Why would you deliberately ignore the MOS here? There is no need to bold these terms, unless redirects exist, and they are already italicised. Bib of Bob (talk) 22:14, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Response here by JacktheBrown: In this case it's correct. I noticed that you're a new user: the rules are right but must be interpreted correctly; in this case it's correct Bib of Bob (talk) 01:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JacktheBrown: That makes no sense. The MOS is quite clear and unambiguous in this case, and the age of username bears no correlation to comprehension of MOS:B, specifically the following bit that is relevant here:

Boldface is often applied to the first occurrence of the article's title word or phrase in the lead. This is also done at the first occurrence of a term (commonly a synonym in the lead) that redirects to the article or one of its subsections, whether the term appears in the lead or not

Are you able to explain why MOS:B does not apply here, and where else it, and the MOS in general, does not apply? Bib of Bob (talk) 02:31, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per the MOS I can't see why these should be bolded (they're not redirect terms) so I've de-bolded them. Popcornfud (talk) 10:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]