Talk:Pint

Untitled

Btw, the *Translation notes* is very important; make sure you keep it!

Half-litre pint / double-pint litre

I was told by my chemistry professor that since the UK joined the EU, they were no longer allowed to sell beer in pints; it had to be called a half liter. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.61.46.16 (talk • contribs) .

So your professor was wrong. Not a big deal actually, it happens all the time anywhere. Metrified English units might have had been a good idea, though. In other countries people call certainly sized glasses and bottles by names of ancient measures nevertheless, although they are in fact truly metric (e.g. the Bavarian Maß is 1 l for over a century, but used to be slightly larger). Christoph Päper 14:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He is wrong, in fact in pubs beer must be sold in pints (or half-pints, or third-pints). This is an exception to the rule that everything is sold in metric measurements (and in any case, you can still sell "568ml" of beer in a bottle). Perhaps, at some point, 'pint of beer' will be defined to be 600ml (or some other volume), as has been done in many other countries. ƕ (talk) 11:44, 28 July 2008 (UTC pints)

I fully concur - actually - for legal reasons a pint glass must not include a "569ML" label even as a supplementary figure in pints from a pub. This was due to 'derogation - meaning that the EU would allow us to keep things as they are - so that's where it has kept it;s historical position. There are 20floz in a UK pit . The equivalent is 568ml.......etc etc etc but the units on the glass must be the real PINT . Hopr this hrlpd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.224.171 (talk) 00:26, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Except some one forgot to tell the glass makers and all of the glassware is designed to hold 570 mL and not 568 mL. Thus when filled, the real pint becomes 570 mL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ametrica (talk • contribs) 00:16, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Amtrica Could you please tell us where you got the notion imperial pint glasses have a capacity of 570 millilitres? In the United Kingdom, imperial pint glasses used to serve draught beer and cidre are approximately 568 millilitres. Those glasses must hold an imperial pint (20 imperial fluid ounces) and be marked 'PINT'. There are also other markings such as a registration number which indicates the body which certified the glassware. Unofficialwikicorrector (talk) 05:38, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As you said they approximate 568 mL as they are designed for 570 mL.

Simply do a google search for 570 mL pint glassware and you will tonnes of this glass size. Plus there are many former British colonies like Australia, New Zealand and South Africa that have retained the pint for use in pubs and bars but have legally defined is as exactly 570 mL. Do you expect glass makers to make two sizes, one for England and another for everyone else? The other problem are machines used for filling bottles and glasses. They can only fill in increments of 10 mL. I'm sure if it meant much to you, you could specially order a machine at great expense to fill in 1 mL increments, but even with that you could still not fill to a pint as defined in England. 568 mL is 261.25 µL undersized.

Do you wish for me to provide links to the 570 mL glassware or can you google it yourself? Ametrica (talk) 16:29, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Flanders annotation

A "pint" in Flanders isn't necessarily a 25 cl glass. A "pint" would translate in English to a "lager". It's just that the most common size for lagers in Flanders is 25 cl... 80.201.183.198 12:56, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pint =12 oz?

Can anyone add any information about why so many bars and restaurants in the United States serve beer in 12 oz "pints," with glasses that look almost exactly like a real 16 Oz US pint? Mrendo 16:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the menu lists "pints" and you are served 12oz, you are being defrauded, and you should report the bar or restaurant to the appropriate regulatory body (Alcoholic Beverage Commission, Restaurant Licensing Board, or whatever). If, on the other hand, you're simply observing that 12oz is the normal serving size in many places (it is also the most common beer bottle size in the US), there's not much to say, is there? --Macrakis 22:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

⅛

I changed ⅛ to 1/8 simply because the 8 is indiscernable from 6, or 9, or 3 at that size. 211.30.75.123 03:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd changed it back but you've got a point. Let's use "1⁄8".J ɪ m p 03:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A pint of water

...weighs a pound and a quarter — an imperial pint does, anyway. 568g of water = 1.25lb. I've changed the page to show this, as it said 1.125lb before.ƕ (talk) 11:44, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recipe confusion

Under "Effects of metrication". Which is it? "Many recipes published in the UK still provide ingredient quantities in imperial," or "Most new recipes are now published in metric only"? The first statement would appear, at second glance, to apply to existing recipes, i.e. published recipes; but then the word "still" interrupts that train of thought. Which is it then? Are many recipes still being published with imperial measures, or are most new recipes being published with metric measures? I know that many ≠ most, but the point being made is not clear, and I'm loth to change the wording for fear of changing the meaning.--Rfsmit (talk) 21:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

=Recipe answer

Almost all cook books quote in imperial and metric.

Pint of liquor

Here in the US, if you go to the liquor store and ask for a pint, you get 375 ml. If you ask for a half pint, you get 200 ml. At one time you could ask for a quart and get 1000 ml, but these days people mostly ask for a liter instead. If you just ask for "a bottle" you get 750 ml, which is also called a "fifth." An "airline bottle" is 50 ml.

These terms are holdovers from the pre-metric days. The "half pint" usually comes in a flattened, curved bottle designed to fit smoothly in a hip pocket. It's the same shape as the pre-metric half pint, which really was a half of a US pint.

27 CFR Part 5, which regulates liquor bottle sizes, is all metric, and does not mention the above common names. I have been unable to find a good reference that describes these terms. Rees11 (talk) 22:22, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's very interesting. 27 CFR Part 5 does not define any units other than the gallon and liter for anything bottled since January 1, 1980. So, if you go to a U.S. liquor store and ask for a "pint", you get an undefined amount of liquor that is whatever is in the bottle they hand you. The U.S. pint is 473 mL, but the nearest size of bottle is 375 mL, so that's what you get. However, if you ask for a "liter", that's a defined term, so they have to give you 1000 mL. Very interesting. However, in the U.K. a pint is a defined term, so if you go into a British pub and ask for a "pint" of beer, they are forced to give you 568 mL, which is the size of the British Imperial pint. Not only that, the alcohol content of British beer is higher, so be prepared to get absolutely smashed if you go pub crawling in Britain. RockyMtnGuy (talk) 23:47, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, in the US beer is still legally measured in pints and fluid ounces but liquor is metric. And at least in my experience if you go into a bar and ask for a "pint" you could get almost any amount, or even a blank stare, but it will come from a tap, not a bottle. In a brewpub you're likely to get an Imperial pint. Rees11 (talk) 01:09, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

-- When I order a drin in the USA I just remember to ask for a20oz cup. Nice and easy :-)

Metric pint?

The article describes a "metric pint" as 500ml. This is not universally true. In New Zealand pint milk bottles were 600ml. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.242.206 (talk) 16:02, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History

The derivation of the imperial gallon from the ale gallon is defined fully in the gallon article. I suggest revising the History paragraph something like this:

In 1824 the British parliament replaced all its variant gallons with the imperial gallon based on the traditional ale gallon. In brief, this was defined as the volume of ten pounds of distilled water at 62 °F (equalling 277.42 cubic inches), from which the imperial pint is derived.

What do you think? GilesW (talk) 10:43, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

British pint versus American pint

Gentlemen - the British pint is 20 imperial fluid ounces, while the American pint is 16 American fluid ounces. However, the American fluid ounce is somewhat larger than the British fluid ounce, so you can't compare them directly. The easiest way is to convert them into metric. The British pint is 568.26125 cm³ while the American pint is 473.176473 cm³, so the British pint is approximately 1.200950 American pints, or about 20% larger.

Remember, no measure of fluid volume is the same between the British imperial and American conventional system, so you are always involved in an apples versus oranges type of conversion. That is why those of us in the rest of the Commonwealth converted all our liquid measures to metric - so we didn't have to deal with this kind of thing.RockyMtnGuy (talk) 01:48, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:One US pint of thousand island dressing.JPG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:One US pint of thousand island dressing.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:39, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pint Glass

Shouldn't this page link to Pint glass ? Robef (talk) 23:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

pint in germany? any source for that?

--GeoTrinity (talk) 22:40, 27 February 2016 (UTC)quote "There is also limited use of the term in parts of France, Quebec ("une pinte") and Central Europe, notably some areas in Germany and Switzerland." pint in Germany? live in Germany never ever have heard of anyone anywhere using a pint - any source for that??? 178.210.114.106 (talk) 22:22, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

and if you mean the cologne pintgen that is not the same as a pint (1 Pintchen = 0,33246 Liter)178.210.114.106 (talk) 22:26, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The term is at least in the Duden as das Pint, confer http://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/Pint_Hohlmasz --GeoTrinity (talk) 22:40, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What subtleties? What is incorrect?

Can someone explain the subtleties that have eluded me, and be specific about the errors I introduced per the the summary in this undoing please? As far as I know: 1 imperial pint does equal 20 imperial fluid ounce, 1 US pint does equal to 16 US fluid ounces and the imperial fluid ounce is about 5% smaller than the US fluid ounce. EzEdit (talk) 07:31, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lets say you order ten thousand pints of water from me. They arrive, you put them in your vat, and determine that I only gave you 9,990 pints. I disagree, and point to the fact that the contents pint glass I used to (laboriously) measure out all of that liquid can indeed by divided into sixteen parts, each of which is a fluid ounce.

You might point out that the fact that I can divide a jar of liquid into sixteen equal measures does not establish that the former is a pint and the latter is a fluid ounce. Instead, you grab a graduated liter beaker and demonstrate that my pint is significantly less than the expected 568mL, and thus I've been shorting my customers.

In casual speech and non-technical references, it's ok to say that a pint is 16 US fluid ounces. That's good enough for home cooking. Beyond that, pints and fluid ounces are certain numbers of milliliters. That's why the lead is correct when it says "the US liquid pint is divided into 16 US fluid ounces", and why you were incorrect when you said "a liquid pint, equal to 16 US fluid ounces". Your version carries the implication that the pint is defined in terms of ounces when it instead is defined in terms of milliliters.

Like I said, it's a subtlety, but it's worth getting right. Garamond Lethet c 14:23, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's too deep for the casual reader. The common definition of a pint is one-eighth of a gallon or 16 US (20 imperial ) fluid ounces. The liter/litre size is only of interest to the real geek. I'll leave out the 5% difference between the 2 fluid ounces though, that's a little geeky too. I left the liter/litre definition in place too, and wrote is out in full as this is the main intro here. Is that a fair compromise? EzEdit (talk) 20:47, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. You are allowed to edit any article you please (barring some technical restrictions), but if you want your edits to stick then you need to be able to convince other editors that you've improved the article. Please establish consensus here first, then edit.Garamond Lethet c 21:13, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So what's your objection to putting the commonly understood definition further up? Would you move the description of the number of cents in a dollar further down the United States dollar article - and replace it with how many yen or euros a dollar is worth today? EzEdit (talk) 21:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a discussion I'm interested in having. If you can establish a consensus here, then your edits will stick. Garamond Lethet c 03:40, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you aren't interested in discussing your objection, and as no-one else has objected, I'll make the changes and see if that triggers any discussion. EzEdit (talk) 17:16, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that there is a reluctance amongst editors of this (and related customary unit) articles to place the customary definitions, in terms of related sub or super customary units, instead insisting that the top section is dominated by obscure and unfamiliar SI definitions and symbology. In places where US/UK customary is used it's just as important, if not more important, to know that a pint is 16 (or 20) fluid ounces than that it is 473 or 568 mL. EzEdit (talk) 18:04, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say you've correctly identified the current consensus. I'd also say you've not advanced a compelling reason to change it. Garamond Lethet c 18:19, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason to change it that I see is that in common usage, and indeed further down in the article, the pint is primarily defined in terms of US/UK units, not metric units. I believe the intro should follow that pattern. But I concede that if you aren't convinced, then with no ally I am backing a loser here.

As a matter of interest, can you show me where the consensus to demote the definition in terms customary units in preference to that using metric units is recorded. I would be interested to see what the compelling argument for it was. EzEdit (talk) 21:57, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here. The compelling argument is that edit was made in Nov. 2011 and has stood the test of time. Garamond Lethet c 02:37, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Poor verifiability

The references in this article are terrible. 2, 3, 5 & 6 aren't references at all. Neither 8, 9 or 10 support what they are cited against. 12 and 13 lead to blank pages. 14 leads to the contents page of an online beer drinkers forum. Should we delete the content relying on those references? EzEdit (talk) 22:56, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2, 3, 5 and 6 are notes, not references. Not sure what you consider the problem to be here.
12 leads to a page with a redirect to the content. You may want to look into upgrading your browser. I've updated the link.
13 took a couple of minutes longer to track down the new url.
14 Correct page in beer drinkers forum found with my first google search. Updated.

Still looking at 8–10.

Thank you for your contribution.

Garamond Lethet c 03:10, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

8 I believe the intent was for the search function on the website to be used, as there are multiple documents available that support this citation. I think the site reference is more useful than any particular pdf; I've updated the citation.
9 is the French-language version of that site.

Garamond Lethet c 03:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

10 and 11 were introduced at the same time as 8 and 9; they appear to be superfluous. I've removed them and combined the other two cites into one.

Garamond Lethet c 03:44, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead image

I liked the old lead image better. It showed an actual quantity of one pint, whereas the new image only shows a container capable of holding one pint. Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:35, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kendall-K1: The previous picture is small in size and just shows a glass with beer, filled up until the edge. There is no reference to a pint. My glass shows the official amount that forms a pint in the UK and even shows the dash for a "half pint". Therefore, I considered it to be better than the old picture. But I can easily add liquid in my glas and upload a newer version soon. Just be patient. Best regards, --GeoTrinity (talk) 22:12, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done! I hope that you like my new image better! Cheers, --GeoTrinity (talk) 22:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The old image was actually a pint, although it wasn't labelled on the glass. You may be confused about image sizes, they can be displayed at any size you want. It has nothing to do with the size of the original image. Kendall-K1 (talk) 23:45, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Was the glass made in Warwickshire? NebY (talk) 23:50, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kendall-K1, I'm sorry, you're wrong: The old image was only available in one size, cf. "Real_Ale_2004-05-09_cropped.jpg ‎(245 × 410 Pixel) No higher solution available" (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Real_Ale_2004-05-09_cropped.jpg). My own pictures have a higher resolution which is an improvement for the users, of course. ~ Hi NebY, It's a bit funny that I as a German have to tell you guys what the numbers stamped on the glasses mean: They stand for the manufacturing glass company or at least the production site. Most glasses used in the UK are produced by Verrerie Cristallerie D'Arques, J G Durand & CIE in Arques, France, by the way. Sometimes, you find "ARCOROC" on the bottom of a glass, it's the aforementioned French company then. The two pint glasses that I got from a pub in northern England many years ago are stamped 1545 which stands for produced in Warwickshire. The glass with the "real ale" above, for example, bears the (hard to read) number 563 which stands for Newport, England. I will add this piece of information soon and share a link to a list of those numbers. Thank you and cheers to the both of you! --GeoTrinity (talk) 00:13, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added the information the "pint glass" article; the list of all numbers can be found here: https://math.colorado.edu/~rmg/pint/DTISTAMP.pdf Best regards, again. --GeoTrinity (talk) 00:31, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That just puts an upper limit on the display size. Users with default image settings would have seen the old image at the same size (220 pixels wide) as the new one after you removed the "upright" param. But if you click through, or have larger than default image prefs, the new one is an improvement. Kendall-K1 (talk) 00:33, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have the same box of blueberries twice

Doesn't look too helpful. Corwin.amber (talk) 04:38, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pint. 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/20140924041635/http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/080.nsf/eng/home to http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/080.nsf/eng/home

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:58, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Google values

According to Google's Unit Converter, there are 9.09218 imperial pints in an imperial gallon[1] and one imperial pint is exactly half a litre[2]. Should we include these innovations? 92.19.28.231 (talk) 19:35, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Google's values are wrong. I have tried to give them feedback to correct this but it has been this way for a number of months. I think they get most this information from their web crawlers anyway so it probably would not be a reliable source too.-Voello (talk) 07:44, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Voello: Very interesting. Can you share with us the details of how their unit converter is wrong? PetesGuide, K6WEB (talk) 16:16, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As 92.19.28.231 said Google's online convertor defines one imperial pint exactly half a litre, see [3], this is at odds with the true definition of around 568ml, which is cited multiple times in this article. Even Google's non-web based converter in Google Docs - the 'convert function' displays the correct result for this value: =CONVERT(1,"uk_pt", "ml") → 568.26125. The web value is probably from a crawler that found the inaccurate value on a third party site like much of the information found in the 'knowledge graphs' google displays after some searches, though it could also just be from a mistaken developer. Voello (talk) 16:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks as if they have corrected it now. Voello (talk) 11:06, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Imperial pint actually 586 ml?

This book from 2011^[1] suggest that a pint is actually 586 mL. Should the mL value on this wiki page perhaps be corrected for the imperial pint? 139.63.39.203 (talk) 16:49, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on where you are. In the commonwealth countries, like Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, the old imperial pint is redefined in law as 570 mL exactly. 568 + mL is the definition in England but not everywhere else. Ametrica (talk) 16:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://books.google.nl/books?id=OAFnAgAAQBAJ&lpg=PT35&hl=nl&pg=PT34#v=onepage&q&f=false

German pintchen?

I'm German and have been drinking beer for half a century. I never ever heard the word "pintchen". According to German wikipedia, the word was used regionally (Cologne) some 200 yrs ago. Do we need it in the table? Wassermaus (talk) 16:15, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It has no reliable source, so yes delete it (in my opinion). --Red King (talk) 23:50, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

done — Wassermaus (talk) 16:26, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Canada

How many times do we say that Canada uses Imperial pints? I count 5: Once in the lead, once in "History", and three times in "Effects of metrication". We also explain about the French pint in Canada twice, in "Other pints" and in "History". GA-RT-22 (talk) 19:11, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Resistance to ounces

Why can I not find a simple sentence that says a US pint contains xx ounces? 98.97.33.68 (talk) 01:23, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps because you have not looked very hard? Dondervogel 2 (talk) 08:26, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion between Canada and France

"The term is still in limited use in parts of France, where une pinte means an imperial quart, which is 2 imperial pints, whereas a pint is une chopine"

I think "une pinte" (a pint) is an imperial quart only in Canada as it is explained somewhere else in the article. But in France, "une pinte" (a pint) is 0,5 liter. 2A01:CB05:892B:500:50A8:5A31:CBD0:B16E (talk) 20:35, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. That quart mention was a parenthetical statement about Quebec alone ("The term is still in limited use in parts of France, and in Quebec—where "une pinte" means an imperial quart, which is 2 imperial pints, whereas a pint is "une chopine"—and Central Europe, notably ...") until someone removed "and in Quebec—".[4] The article already covers Quebec in the previous paragraph and the "Other pints" section, so rather than reinstate "and in Quebec—", we can simply lose the inappropriate statement. I'll do that now. NebY (talk) 09:44, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Everything that it says on the page about pint being an ancient term in France needs rewriting. Everyone in France uses 'une pinte' all the time to mean 'half a litre'. No doubt this has been taken from the English for a pint rather than from the former French usage.SillyMidOff (talk) 21:55, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://books.google.nl/books?id=OAFnAgAAQBAJ&lpg=PT35&hl=nl&pg=PT34#v=onepage&q&f=false

[1]