Jump to content

Talk:Brunch

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

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 October 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yifannn.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The author of this article is a moron and pushing some sort of pro brunch agenda."

[edit]

Brunch stops at when lunch begins. If brunch happens to run into the afternoon that's one thing, but if you START eating brunch after 12:00pm, you're eating lunch! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.142.5.2 (talk) 17:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I'm not a brunch expert, but I think "brunch" entails more than just what time of day you eat. I think it also entails the fact that people wake up relatively late on a Saturday or Sunday, they don't eat breakfast, and they eat many traditional breakfast items (pancakes, waffles, etc) during the late morning or very early afternoon. That's what I always though brunch was. Can someone clarify? Skyduster (talk) 16:41, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

French word for brunch

[edit]

The explanation word-for-word this means "big little lunch." for, le grand petit déjeuner, is lame. Petit déjeuner is the term in French for breakfast. A little lunch is peu de déjeuner. A word-for-word translation adds nothing. I'll wait a little while and then remove it. 216.94.11.2 (talk) 15:26, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't understand why this entry even mentions the Académie Française. As the entry itself states, the brunch tradition is an American/Canadian tradition, not a French tradition. It does make sense to discuss the word for brunch in Quebec French, but France is completely irrelevant to this article, and so are the German-speaking countries for that matter. If no one has any response within a few months, I'm changing the French language entry to discuss only Canadian French. Skyduster (talk) 16:36, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is just another example of the French imposing their version of events on the English Wikipedia. I first became aware of French editors behaviour on the Battle Of Agincourt article. After some research I discovered that many articles that involved the French had been edited to suit their local version of events irrespective of the facts. It took two and a half years to re-write so many pages. What they did in the early days was transpose French wiki articles onto the English site albeit translated. However, when yours truly attempted to set the French wiki articles to right it caused a storm of protest again irrespective of historical fact. Twobells (talk) 23:50, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I doubt that people in France are conspiring to "impose their version of events on English Wikipedia", as I have never encountered anything like this. My guess is that the reference to the Académie française was written by either a Canadian contributor (could be either anglo or francophone), or by an American who -for whatever reason- thinks that the French practice this American tradition. For some reason, many Americans imagine French culture as North American, Anglo-Saxon, or Germanic, sharing many similarities with American culture...which is not true, of course, but that's the perception many Americans have. The French-language Wikipedia article on brunch does briefly mention that brunch "appeared in France in the 1980s" and that "numerous cafes and restaurants offer it", but I have never seen this in France, nor is that statement in the French article sourced. Here in the English-language article for brunch, there's two footnotes supporting the paragraph about how the Académie française feels about the word "brunch", but both of these sources are horribly dubious and unreliable. The first source is simply titled "Anglicismes et les mots préférés", but it is not a proper bibliography, nor does it provide a URL link to any website. The second source is a bibiography to a 1993 Larousse dictionary; but just because there's a French word for brunch, doesn't mean it's practiced in France, as France is not the only French-speaking country in the world (Larousse's word for brunch probably stems from brunch being practiced in French-speaking Canada). Brunch is just not practiced in France, so the entire Académie française paragraph, and how the Académie française feels about the word "brunch" is totally irrelevant, at least here in the English-language article. I've deleted it from the article. Skyduster (talk) 04:59, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The British version of brunch could be elevenses."

[edit]

AIUI brunch and elevenses are two incomparable concepts, the only thing in common being the kind of time of day. Brunch is a full-blown meal, effectively combining breakfast and lunch (as an alternative to having two separate meals). OTOH, elevenses is a snack filling in a bit of the space between breakfast and lunch. So does it really make sense to call either version of the other? -- Smjg 17:42, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Brunch is any sit down meal that occurs between the times of 9:30am - 11:45 am. The food served at Brunch is typically dominated by breakfast foods, but this has nothing to do with the definition of the word. The word comes from BReakfast and lUNCH and by definition only entails a time of day as opposed to type of food.


BRUNCH IS IF YOU COMBINE A BIG BREAKFAST WITH A LUNCH! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.123.196 (talk) 19:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About "Brunch Culture and Marketing"

[edit]

The "Brunch Culture and Marketing" section feels kinda POV, and is difficult to understand for anyone not familiar with American pancake culture. Still interesting though, so don't take it out! --Apoc2400 11:16, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree here. Pancakes are a sweet (desert) in most English speaking cultures, with the notable exception of north America. I've lived in both the UK and Australia, and the only cafes or restaurants where I've seen pancakes served with breakfast / brunch / lunch / etc are those which have an American theme (the type which serve fast food snacks like burgers and "hot dogs"), or pancake outlets like Australia's Pancake Parlour (which also maintains an Americanesque theme). I realise Wikipedia is based in the USA, but I think this article is overly American in its perspective. I suggest the article either explicit clarifies that it is written from an American perspective, or else be re-written. Mark Micallef 05:46, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree totally. It's clearly written from an American POV with no attempt at all to make it sensible or accessible to other English-speakers. Also, it has no wikilinks when I can see several that would make sense. It looks like either a copyvio or a direct (original research?) braindump from an editor. I've tagged for cleanup. -dmmaus 00:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why not just delete this section entirely? It's full of very specific claims that are not common knowledge, but not cited eiter. Actually, the claims seem pretty dubious to me. They beg for support, but none has been provided. Lack of citation is adequate grounds for deletion. Rohirok 02:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it was me. I was new here (didn't even have an account yet) and in a hurry when I authored this. The POV criticism of this is a good one. I am working on collecting the citations to fix this. It is also USA centric, which I can also fix. It was inspired by POV, but the facts evidencing the statements are freely available in form of restaurant reviews, menus, discussion board statements, blogs, and cultural commentary... the usual crazy variety of things that comprise Internet sources. Of course by linking to some raw factual information, e.g. a series of menus, this might blur the line on "original research" versus "outside sources." Thoughts on that? --Em dee aitch 09:23, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought your Brunch Marketing section was somewhat amusing, but I don't really think it belongs here. The point seems to be this: In American restuarants, food sold as brunch is more expensive than very similar or identical food sold without the bruch label. If you can document that claim, then it might be a mildly interesting and amusing piece of information for the article. Your elaborations are kinda entertaining (in my American opinion), but I don't think they are very informative, and apparently they are merely baffling to people in some parts of the world.
By the way, here's a funny thing about POV. Even if every single fact is documented and citationed, an article or a section can still be POV. It looks like your intent here is to say, "Ha ha, look how ridiculous brunch purveyors are," and filling in all those citations isn't going to change that. You could probably kill a lot of the POV by heavily editing the section. If you feel like doing so would kinda ruin the whole point of what you've written, that may be a clue that you've added TOO MUCH POV.
(pardon the mess?, this is the first time I've commented on a talk page) I was looking into cleaning up the marketing section a bit, I think I've perhaps axed a bit much, removing most of the flavor (heh) of the previous paragraphs, but perhaps this might be a good footing to expand back from.
  1. REDIRECT[[<math>Insert non-formatted text here</math>]]

History of brunch

[edit]

Where did brunch come from? Some Catholic co-workers claim its because they cannot eat before church, so they started having an early lunch immediately after services. --24.249.108.133 17:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Yorkers only get drunk?

[edit]

I am a little bit confused about why there is such emphisis put on the fact that in New York brunch is often greased filled etc because they go out and drink a lot. This is making a massive stereo type that any other city like London, Berlin, Prague, Chicago, Sydney people don't stay out late and get trashed. Maybe I am knit-picking but I really find it hard to find why it is put under its own section. I am sure every student knows that brekki of a fry up comes at about 11am trying to wake up a bit for the next nights binge, it has nothing to do with New York per-say. You can equally make this argument about any city! Kicken18 16:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree. Every single statement in this section equally applies to Chicago as well as New York and probably many other cities worldwide. I got rid of all the New York-centric language. 24.136.29.87 (talk) 05:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How can you have such a page on BRUNCH, and the word MIMOSA does not even appear once? (But those might be mimosas, in the photo.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.210.153 (talk) 03:09, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More Simpsons Brunch Trivia

[edit]

I think we need even more Simpsons trivia regarding brunch. Say, ten or twelve more examples.72.78.154.193 (talk) 00:09, 26 February 2008 (UTC). i agree.[reply]

Greenfield?

[edit]

First of all - what the heck is Greenfield? A town? A school? A retirement community? A TV reality show? No link in the section offers any explanation, and no sources are referenced. Second, whatever it is, this sections seems very specifically localized, and doesn't seem to warrant inclusion in the article. If we were to list every local institution's brunch traditions, the page would go on forever. Unless someone can offer a valid reason why this section should be there, I'd recommend removing it. Just seems too specific to be noted in a general article like this. Lurlock (talk) 14:06, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Question about the timing of brunch

[edit]

This article says that "brunch is normally taken before 2 pm" but I wish to go further than that. Surely a meal taken between twelve noon and two p.m. would normally be counted as lunch, not brunch; would not brunch be nearer the normal time of elevenses? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 15:29, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The number of edits in the history of this article made purely to excise any mention of brunch lasting until after or even beginning after noon are hilarious. Every restaurant I've been to that serves brunch serves it until at least 2 in the afternoon, and it is incresingly available on both Saturdays and Sundays. This should be defined by usage, not by some semantically-focused demand that brunch not go past the arbitrarily-defined hour that ends "morning". Dayv (talk) 17:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is an issue that needs to be resolved with some kind of cited source. Obviously, brunch is a combination of breakfast and lunch, but there are at least three ways this can be interpreted: (1) Breakfast is served in the early morning, lunch at midday--therefore "brunch" is any meal served between those times, i.e. in the late morning, regardless of what is served and eaten; OR (2) When typical breakfast food is served at lunchtime, it is called "brunch"; OR (3) When a person sleeps until noon, the first meal eaten by such a person is called "brunch", again regardless of what is served. In my anecdotal experience all three of these are sometimes used, and I think this silly natter would be resolved by acknowledging that the word is ambiguous and can mean more than one thing. However, we'll need a source for that. Chalkieperfect (talk) 20:23, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I came to the article in part due to an interest in something akin to the third usage above. This is only in my experience but what was referred to me as Sunday brunch in New York, at a time when I used to visit the place occasionally, was taken at a time of day I'd normally associate with a late lunch (or late dinner really, being Scots; i.e. 1400ish). I'd be interested to know if that's a commonplace and citable usage. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:42, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I pretty much agree with Chalkieperfect. Wikipedia requires reliable sources. Even assuming we find them, I think the best we'll come up with is that, as Chalkie says, the word is ambiguous.--Larry (talk) 21:04, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday brunch

[edit]

We really need a section on this. Sunday brunch has been around for a long time, eg this New York Times article from Feb 12, 1939. It's international - Sunday brunch is served at upscale restaurants in Mumbai, Rome, London etc. This book[1] accurately says that lines go out onto the streets at the good restaurants. This [2] discusses it about it costs to read it. Dougweller (talk) 14:43, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Having encountered Sunday brunch in New York, it would seem to be a phenomenon which would be worth covering in this article for sure but as far as I'm aware it's pretty much of a North American phenomenon. If it's found at all internationally, it isn't commonplace, in my experience. Not that I'm in the habit of frequenting upscale restaurants but I've never heard anyone talking about going for Sunday brunch (certainly not with any implication it would be different to brunch on any other day) in London or elsewhere in the UK and if they did I'd assume they meant a mid-morning meal which happened to fall on a Sunday. Maybe in hotels with transatlantic clientele though? Not that everyone has Sunday dinner either but in it's N.Am. sense Sunday brunch would coincide or clash. Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:07, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Linking origin to Asian traditions

[edit]

The statement "The popularity may be linked to the Asian traditions brought back to England by colonials..." may be correct, but a reliable source is required. Quoting a passage from a short story by Maugham doesn't mean it's true. Speculating it might be true is original research. --Larry (talk) 14:23, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brunch. 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:

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) 20:03, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Brunch. 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:

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) 15:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When is brunch?

[edit]

I've removed any reference to time; here's why. This phrase has been subject to all sorts of changes. The large majority of changes lacked references, and were reverted. The change I reverted includes no reference in the article, but references one in the comment. However, the change still contradicts the current reference. I think it's safe to say that there are different references with different definitions. I guess we could start listing multiple definitions, with references for each, but short of strong evidence that one definition is primary, we would mostly be doing analysis/research -- a Wikipedia no-no. Any suggestions? --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 22:00, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Time reduc

[edit]

@Traveling Man: the time is back and being edit-warred. Website Thekitchn.com says weekends 11-4.[3] The London Evening Standard has an article discussing some restaurants and shows their brunch times range between 10 and 4 (although one has an all day brunch).[4] This history of brunch says brunch times varies between cultures on page 54.[5] Doug Weller talk 10:12, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Thanks for doing the research. I wasn't surprised to see the time reinserted. After all, people are likely to want to know about the time, even if it isn't clear. I also found an article in Houstonia (magazine) which talks about a wide range of time definitions.[6] If you have a preference, I'd support any of the following:
  • no time specified
  • a range that seems to fit what you think the London Evening Standard leans to
  • some attempt to summarize what the various sources say, although I fear that is edging toward original research/analysis. --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 13:08, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Traveling Man: sorry to be so slow. I think we can say something about times varying according to culture, etc as we have a good source for that in the book. We might be able to use the Houstonia article to back that up also. And specifically include something like in America and England times can vary between x and y using the Kitchn and the London Standard. Doug Weller talk 06:12, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Doug Weller: I like your approach. Mentioning the difference in different cultures should help. I'd be comfortable with a range of times for America and England -- perhaps per the London Evening Standard's 10 and 4, or something similar if you have a different range in mind. I likely won't be back on Wikipedia for a bit, so feel free to make whatever edits you feel appropriate, or I can take a crack at it in a few days. --Larry/Traveling_Man (talk) 20:25, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ehmling source for developing article

[edit]

I came here to give a source: https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/handle/2152/65244/ehmlingmorgan_Thesis_2018.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y is a thesis including on Sunday brunch becoming a thing, evolving from New Orleans to New York, in 1920s-1930s. SUNNY SIDE UP: THE STORIED PAST OF AMERICA’S MOST IMPORTANT MEAL OF THE DAY by Morgan Leigh Ehmling. Including agreement with what is currently in article. A quote: "the earliest written appearance of the word brunch can be found in an 1895 publication of Britain’s Hunter’s Weekly entitled “Brunch: 51 A Plea.”"

But going on with history in New Orleans and coming to New York, much more. Another quote: "Though the first written instance of “brunch” was in 1895 England, New Orleans’ own Tujague’s (pronounced Two Jacks) argues that upon its founding in 1856, they were the first restaurant in the United States to serve what we know today as brunch....." As a student's thesis at University of Texas at Austin, it is legitimately reviewed and meticulously referenced i think. Way better than this Wikipedia article is, currently, IMHO.

By the way I agree with a commenter above, many years ago, that Sunday Brunch is a thing, is the thing really IMHO, needs explicit treatment. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 03:54, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prolonged slow-motion edit war over brunch time

[edit]

I've just come across the slow-motion edit war occurring over the specific times stated in the lead paragraph at which brunch is supposedly served. I'd like to get this settled, and so I've replaced the sentence for now with While there is no universally accepted exact time at which the meal is served, it is generally understood to be somewhere within the late morning and early afternoon. - as far as I can see from the very limited discussion on this page right now, this covers everyone's perspectives at least fairly well, acknowledging the lack of a well-defined agreement between reliable sources. If this is not an acceptable solution, please feel free to propose an alternative (backed up by reliable sources). Tollens (talk) 22:33, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the article start by calling brunch “lort”?

[edit]

What is lort? Why does this article say it’s a meal? Is it brunch? 2A00:23C8:A941:3B01:B959:8556:EDDE:53E8 (talk) 12:56, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Uninformed information on origin of the word "brunch"

[edit]

Maybe the uninformed mishmash of information about the origin of the word "brunch" should be replaced by someone looking up the facts in the Oxford English Dictionary.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brunch&oldid=1225530832"