Talk:Chili powder/Archive 1

Old discussions
Chili powder redirects to Spice mix, is this stub necessary?

I just expanded Chili powder so it is no longer a redirect. Joyous 20:41, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

So wait, you just told me it's different than chile powder (which is just dried chiles), but a heaping teaspoon of chili powder is equal to a whole chile pepper? A chile pepper doesn't have any cumin or anything in it. How can that be? -65.27.76.113 20:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

No, India is not the earliest use of chilies, since they are American in origin.Mydogtrouble (talk) 18:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Is there a reliable source for the distinction between "chile powder" and "chili powder"? I've heard conflicting reports on this one; apparently mostly based on hearsay. Confuseddave 15:08, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

bullshit recipe. come on. thats not what ppls put in it. maybe thats what a hungarian would put in it. come up with a better one, or i will. eigenlambda 03:32, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem with merging this is that it is very long, it would need to be edited down. maybe I will go ahead and add a 'Chili mix' subsection on Chili powder, I am not familiar with exactly how to delete this article through merging it. Lets see what I can accomplish, it can always be reverted. Seth J. Frantzman 12:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I have moved this article to chili powder, it was a useless page and there is no real disctinction betwen the two except that chili mix is a derivitve of chili powder.Seth J. Frantzman 12:39, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

First of all, in the UK its CHILLI powder, with 2 L's always has been, always will be I've never heard of anyone spelling iy Chile powder which implies it comes from the country of Chile, not the spicy Chilli pepper —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.127.146 (talk) 18:47, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Insufflation
I tried sniffing it up my nose.... It burned as f*** but I had a great laugh later thinking of what i had done xD

Minor changes (NOT Minor Edit) by JMBryant
I have attempted to clarify the paprika issue by clarifying the distinction between powdered chiles, paprika and cayenne.

I have also mentioned some of the additional ingredients used in many varieties of chili powder but have not added them to the recipe given.

We use chilli powder in south Indian cooking. This means only powder form of red pepper no cumin added.So the distinction between chilli powder and Chile is confusing. We need to see what is practically used terms and clarify it from there.

I HOPE SOMEONE OUT THERE READS THIS BECAUSE I CONSIDER THIS A JOKE. IS THERE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CHILI POWDER AND CHILE POWDER - YOU BET, A MAJOR ONE TO ANY COOK. CHILI POWDER HAS BEEN ADULTERATED WITH SPICES SUCH AS OREGANO & CUMIN, WHILE CHILE POWDER IS PURE, GROUND FROM ANY NUMBER OF VARITIES OF CHILES SUCH AS ANCHO, GUAJILLO, NEW MEXICO, HABANERO, CHIPOTLE, (Kokopelli&#39;s Kitchen (talk) 02:09, 11 February 2008 (UTC))

Article
This article needs to be written in a more formal tone, with references made to sources.

Tumble-Weed

Is this some sort of joke? How is the reader to distinguish between the two? Why not just make it a tiny piece of the real chili power page? I will try to re-write this article, but I think its almost a hoaz. Seth J. Frantzman 23:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Moved to Chili mix
I have moved this article to Chili mix to end the confusion and I have done some editing. Seth J. Frantzman 00:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Salt
I believe this stuff usually contains salt. This should be noted. Badagnani (talk) 01:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Done. Badagnani (talk) 01:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging
This article talk page was automatically added with WikiProject Food and drink 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) 15:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

This page is incorrect
According to Good Eats which IMHO is a great source on food science, Chili Powder is multiple spices that includes ground peppers that makes it a season over anything else. Chile Powder which is not as common in most mega markets is just ground peppers of different kinds. I will try to find some data to show that and make the change documented. --Mihsfbstadium (talk) 02:25, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * http://www.purcellmountainfarms.com/Chile%20Powder.htm shows all kinds of chile powders that are of pepper origin. http://www.panix.com/~clay/cookbook/bin/show_ingredient.cgi?chili-powder shows multiple recipes for chili powder that have peppers along with other spices.  I do think this needs to be changed.  --Mihsfbstadium (talk) 02:34, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed merge
I propose we merge Chile powder into this article, Chili powder. To me the first of these looks like a clear hoax: no independent evidence has been provided that it is not a simple spelling variation (or even just a mis-spelling) of the same thing, and it seems that anyway one includes the other (as stated in the definition given in the chili powder article). I haven't seen any such evidence yet – if it exists, let's see it, and we can keep them separate. We certainly cannot keep them separate without sources. Richard New Forest (talk) 21:49, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * If you would look at Alton Brown's TV show Good Eats Episode Chili's Angles it will explain exactly what the difference is. These two spices are similar but completely different.  Chili powder is always a mixture of chilies and/or other spices.  Chile powder is just chilies nothing else is added.  They give off two completely style of flavor.  --Mihsfbstadium (talk) 22:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I thought I'd do some Googling... I could find many recipes for chili powder as a blend of spices, and several of these mention that it can be pure chillies, so we agree on that.  However, I could find no source stating that chile powder had to be pure chillies, and furthermore I found many recipes for chile powder as a blend (eg:, , ).  In every case the spelling of the powder was the same as that used in the same source for the chillies themselves.  This surely shows conclusively that the only difference is spelling.


 * Now then. In the UK we (usually) spell it "chilli", and when I looked for recipes for making chilli powder I found only one which referred to any ingredients but pure chillies (that one was ).  This does suggest that when spelt that way it is not usually a blend, but I think the reason is cultural – we just tend to use spices pure, or as "proper" mixes (like garam masala), so we would never think of having a recipe for chilli powder that was not just, um, powdered chilli.  I suspect there may also be legal reasons – I think that here a blend would have to be clearly sold as such to avoid misleading consumers.  So could there be a case for simply changing the name of chile powder to chilli powder?  I don't think so, as the American chili/chile powder can also be pure, so pure chilli powder is already covered perfectly well by the Chili powder article.  Overall I can see no good argument against having a single article covering both the variations in spelling and the variations in recipe.  Richard New Forest (talk) 09:09, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I think you are forgetting that one important aspect. Chili Con Carne is spiced with chili powder.  The mixture of chili powder provides a good balance of spices.  Chile powder though is hotter and would not necessary be used in chili con carne since it is just ground chilies and as a result would not bring the usual spices to the fold.  I could see chile powder is use when you just want to add heat to a dish without a lot of added flavors.  The spelling although extremely similar make these two spices completely different.


 * Now remember when I mean hotter for chile powder versus chili powder is when you have the same chilies being used in both powders the chili powder with the added spices would make it cooler in heat terms than just straight chile powder. Yes it is extremely nitpicking but the same can be said in regards to say 5 spice powder and how it could be labeled as a curry powder along with any other spice mixture.  When a spice mixture is well known in certain areas and typically has the same recipe through out it should be noted as such.  --Mihsfbstadium (talk) 22:33, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't think any of that is an argument for keeping the articles separate. Chili/chile/chilli powder can be pure chilli or a blend of spices; different recipes are used in different places or for different purposes.  This can be explained in the article, if references can be found.  As I've shown above, the blend is spelt in all three ways, and so is the pure chilli powder – we can't have duplicate articles based on spelling variations.   (Personally I'd use pure chilli for chilli con carne, then add other spices too...)  Richard New Forest (talk) 22:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * There is a reason for the different spellings for Chilies. That is because every culture has some things that make it spelled one way versus the other.  Take Flavour, I tend to spell it that way but most americans go with flavor.  Its just a bit of french canadian in me that does it.  As for chile powder and chili powder those are spelled the way they are because they are different in how they are made.  chile powder is just chilies and chili powder is chilies with other seasonings.  I have not seen any other ways of spelling these in the supermarket or online.  In the articles there is references to how these are made with what spellings.  I am not sure how else to explain but the pepper article is correct with have multiple names but to say both powders are the same would not to be correct.  --Mihsfbstadium (talk) 17:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Please look at the links I gave above. They clearly show that all three spellings can be either version. You may use different spellings for the different versions, but I see no good evidence that this distinction is made consistently by others (the ref you gave is not really a good one). Whatever they are called, I can't see that pure chilli powder and blended chilli powder are different enough to warrant different articles. Still waiting for a good argument to keep two articles. Richard New Forest (talk) 19:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * hold on you say Alton Brown, a New England Food Institute graduate who has take to the most scientific approach to teaching people about food on Food Network and is highly known in the states for his approach is not a valid source. Now that is comical.  Why do we have an article on Garlic Salt and Garlic.  They are very similar to each other but one is completely different from the other.  The chile powder/chili powder discussion here is the same.  One is a SPICE MIXTURE and the other is just what it says powdered chilies.  Now please stop this discussion as it is getting to be a waste of time.  They are different and the link I provided if you do not want to consider it good enough then you need to find some links that show these are the same as I have shown that they are different.  And by the way why would not listen to a certified chef is my question?  --Mihsfbstadium (talk) 00:59, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Firstly, I did not say Alton Brown is not a good authority – for all I know he is, though I've never heard of him myself, and I'm not too sure why a TV chef should also be an authority on spelling (several excellent ones I can think of can barely spell at all...). What I did say was that the ref you gave is not adequate: it is a transcript of a light-hearted TV show, which is itself a tertiary source and does not give its own sources – that's not me considering it inadequate, it's WP:Reliable sources. Secondly, on WP the onus is on proving something true, not disproving it.  Thirdly, I have anyway already shown that if there is a difference, in general usage it is nothing to do with the spelling – Alton Brown's usage is certainly not universal (the most we could say is something like "powdered chilli and chilli powder blend are sometimes distinguished by different spellings").


 * Your argument about garlic salt and garlic is a good one (although in that particular case there is precious little material in Garlic salt and it should perhaps be a para in Garlic). The question is, are powdered chilli and chilli powder blend really different enough to warrant separate articles?  Most of the sources describe them together in the same breath and few mention any difference in use, so at present I can't see that there is sufficient difference (although I'm still willing to be persuaded).  There are very many articles which cover two or more similar things, and there would be no hurt in having these together – indeed, that would allow better explanation of their differences.


 * Finally, if there were to be two articles (which is far from established), they would need to be disambiguated by something other than spelling, as all spellings are used for both. We would need something like Chili powder (blend) and Powdered chili.  Richard New Forest (talk) 09:04, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

No further comments, so I propose to do the merge. Any last-minute comments...? Richard New Forest (talk) 19:06, 7 October 2009 (UTC)


 * No more comments, so articles merged. Richard New Forest (talk) 20:06, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

AJI
Aji word is better than Chile, not to be confused with the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Albedu (talk • contribs) 19:11, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * No one is confused. Kuru  talk  21:10, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Aji pepper seems to be a different species from the usual chillies, so wouldn't be correct anyway. Anyway I'm struggling to think of a context where one might really get muddled between a country and a spice mix!  Or indeed a country and a popular Christmas roasting fowl, or a large root vegetable and a Scandinavian person...  Richard New Forest (talk) 00:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Proposed split
User:Mihsfbstadium has attempted to split this article into two, Chile powder and Chile powder, without discussion: their view is that one is pure ground chilli powder, the other a blend of chilli with other spices. Previous very extensive discussion on a similar proposal at Talk:Chile powder failed to reveal any reliable sources to support it. I suggest we discuss it further here before any split. The following points need to be met if a split is to be done:
 * We need reliable sources to show that there is a notable difference between a pure powder and a chilli blend.
 * If they are indeed different, we need reliable sources to show that there is some significant difference in use between the two.
 * If both these differences stand up, yes, we can split, but we need to decide what the two articles are to be called. We certainly need very good sources if they are to be separated only by spelling.

So far as I recall from previous discussion we have just one source that holds that there is a difference, and that the two are spelt differently. This "source" is a transcript of a light-hearted TV show hosted by a well-known TV chef, which certainly does not meet WP's requirements for reliable sources.

My own view is that the "two" are essentially the same thing, spelt differently, and several good culinary sources support this: these all say that it can be either pure powder or a blend, they make little or no distinction in use, and they all use their local spelling for both types (the plant may be spelt "chilli", "chile" or "chili" depending on regional variety of English).

Notwithstanding all that, it would be very misleading to have two articles about nearly the same thing separated only by spelling, especially as both forms may be given any of the three spellings! The blend would have to be called something like "Chili powder blend".

I would be more than happy to be proved wrong on any of these points, but until then, I think we really do have to stick with the article as it stands. Richard New Forest (talk) 22:45, 14 September 2010

[Discussion below copied from Richard New Forest (talk) 12:16, 15 September 2010 (UTC) ]

If you do not want to listen to the discussion and the links I provided then so be it but the issue remains these are NOT the same ingredients. They are different and leave that way. If you want to argue about fine but the simple fact one is powdered chilies and the other is a mixture of said chilies and other spices. I use Alton Brown because guess what he the best when it comes to finding out about ingredients and foods. No other chef out there has actually taken the time to explain the difference. Mihsfbstadium (talk) 20:28, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi. This is a very old discussion...  As you are well aware I did listen to your arguments and address them in some detail, and you were unable to provide evidence that came close to meeting WP's requirements for reliable sources (as I recall it was only one source, not "links") (And of course there could be a good reason why only Alton Brown has bothered to claim there's a difference...)  Without searching particularly hard I was able to provide several good sources contrary to your view.  I only made the merge after repeated prompting for further evidence, which was not forthcoming, and I'm afraid I took your continued silence as acquiescence in the face of overwhelming evidence.


 * We are still waiting for evidence to support your view, and I'm very surprised that you feel able to split the article without providing it. I'll revert your changes for the moment, then I suggest you do find evidence to support your view and reopen the discussion properly before splitting the article, if editors can come to a consensus to do so.  I would be very happy to be proved wrong on this.  Further discussion at Talk:Chili powder please.  Thanks.  Richard New Forest (talk) 21:43, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I did provide other links in a post above it. You guys just refuse to believe it.  Thats fine and your can say whatever you want.  The simple fact is one is a SPICE MIX and one is a SPICE.  There you can debate all you want but its the same for Seasoning Salt and Salt.  One is a SPICE MIX and one is a spice.  Another one is Garlic Powder and Garlic Salt.  One is a SPICE and one is SPICE MIX.  I can list more if you want but the simple fact is Chili Powder and Chile Powder are two diffrent items and to make this site better off I took it upon myself to correct it.  If you dont like it fine but take it up to the mods then.  I wont because I have spent enough time on this and dont feel like I need to argue with people who will not listen.  Mihsfbstadium (talk) 06:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

[End of copied discussion]

I am certainly not "refusing to believe" anything: I am ready to believe anything backed up by evidence. Unfortunately you haven't provided much if any of that yet. The pages you mention don't really say anything except that some people make a mix of chilli powder and other spices, and some of these people call it "chili powder". In addition, they are just self-published web pages which are not reliable sources – I or anyone else of an even greater level of ignorance could put up such a page saying anything we like. It is true (which I had not noticed before), that one of your links at one point uses one spelling for the blend and another for the fruit, but it is not even clear whether this is a mistake or deliberate. For example, lower down on that page the various recipes use inconsistent spellings, and one even says "for chili seasoning ... 8 parts chili powder, 2 parts ground cumin...", which directly contradicts your view.

We all have to accept the convention on Wikipedia that we include what can be reffed, not what is "true", however strongly we happen to believe it. You may be perfectly right when you say "the simple fact is Chili Powder and Chile Powder are two diffrent items", and clearly you are totally convinced you are right. Unfortunately that is not enough: you have to be able to show that it is so from published sources. At the moment we have no real sources that show it to be so, but several quite good ones that show it not to be so.

I can think of one potential solution. If, as you claim, there really is a significant difference in use between powdered chilli and chilli blends (and you have not nearly shown this yet), then we could have two articles, but with clearly different titles. One would say something like "Powdered chilli, also known as chili powder, chilli powder or chile powder is powdered chillies or other hot peppers...". The other would say something like "Chilli seasoning, also known as chilli powder mix, chili powder, chilli powder or chile powder, is a blend of powdered chilli with other spices including..." (I have written this using British spelling, but you get the idea). We do also need to include the various refs in the article, which I'm afraid none of us has done yet.

Meanwhile can we please leave the article as it was until we have discussed this further: edit warring will not get anyone anywhere. Richard New Forest (talk) 12:05, 15 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Why do I need to explain again that one is spice mix and one is a spice. If you want to argue further then fine but its your loss of time on a stupid merger.  I explained multiple times and if you want me to list off the indgediants for chile powder and chili powder I can its simple.  Chile powder is powdered version of any chile.  Chili powder is one or more chile powders mixed with cumman, salt, garlic, and other spices.  If you think that is orinigal research well I just read off the back of my McCormick Chili powder bottle I have.  Mihsfbstadium (talk) 06:51, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Some more links for you to chew on, http://www.mccormick.com/Products/Herbs-and-Spices/Spices-A-to-Z/Chili-Powder-Hot-Mexican-Style.aspx for chili powder and here is one for chile powder http://www.purcellmountainfarms.com/Chile%20Powder.htm btw I pointed this out before and poeople ignored me so if you do so agian oh well, I am used to of it. Mihsfbstadium (talk) 07:07, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I did ask that you leave the article as it is until we had come to a consensus. I am not going to continue an edit war: please will you now return it to how it was until the discussion has reached a conclusion.  I think you know very well that on WP we do not change things under discussion until we have consensus.  I am assuming good faith in your actions, but I must say I'm beginning to struggle.


 * You do not need to explain "again", you only have to do it once, but you have not yet done so: you have merely insisted that you are right. I'm afraid that's not explaining at all, it's just insisting, and that's one reason why we have to have refs on WP.  I have not ignored anything you've said: I have considered it carefully but I have not agreed with you.  Have you considered what others have said?


 * Again your links (one of which you've actually given before) only show that some people use the term "chili powder" for a chilli powder blend. We already know this, and it is not the issue under discussion.  I have asked you repeatedly before to provide evidence, but I will make the most important point again:
 * Please provide a published source that chilli powder blend and pure chilli powder are significantly different in use. This should be easy if it's true (as I suspect it may be).  If it is true, then we could have two articles, but you have to show it to be so, not just insist that it is.


 * I've made this as clear as I can. If you can provide a source, fine.  If not, I'll do as I did before: wait a reasonable time to see if refs turn up (or I find them myself), and then undo your undiscussed split, if for some reason you have not already done it.  Richard New Forest (talk) 19:21, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Why do I even talk to you. Its pointless.  I give you two links which tell the difference and yet you do not care.  I mean what is with you.  Did you forget to read what I said.  As for reverting it back nah, I leaving it the way it was before you went ahead and did it after I said there is a difference and provided sources.  If you want to argue that fact to a mod feel free to but I suggest you do not want to get laughed at.  The simple aspect is that I did what I supposed to do and provided the said resources but you laughed at them.  Frankly that is disrespectful.  I call it like it is.  I give you some more links but then you change the rules again.  As I said to you before and now I have to change it again 'How many links do I need to provide to prove this or do I find every store on the web that sells chile powder and chili powder to make the point across.'  Frankly I do not have the time do that but I am willing to try if you give me a few years.  I did what you asked but you change the rules so will you just give up on this and just consider the fact that they are different so when folks look up the info they will not be confused.  Having it split with the proper names is the best idea I have as your idea will just confuse people to no end.  Mihsfbstadium (talk) 10:37, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I wonder if you're participating in the same discussion. I have not laughed at you or anyone else.  I have looked carefully at what you have said and the links you have provided.  I have explained in detail why they do not support your position.  I have taken care to treat you with respect even when you do not seem willing to engage in discussion.  I am very willing to listen to any coherent arguments you put forward, and look at any evidence you provide.  In fact I'm actually quite sympathetic to your position, but we cannot just go on your insistence that you are right: we need evidence; we also need to avoid having articles with confusing titles if we can.  Please now discuss this sensibly, and do me the courtesy of taking notice of what I have said, as I believe I have done for you.  Richard New Forest (talk) 21:09, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Don't complain to me about the name of the articles. Yes it is confusing but how about their, there, and they're that's the English language for ya.  All of them are pronounced the same but have different meanings.  So do not go on about the names of the articles and drop it.  As for the difference I asked you multiple times how many sites do you want me to list to get my point across.  You have refused to answer that to me.  I provided 3 initially when the debate was up and you throw those out.  So I gave you 2 more and you throw those out mind you one is from one of largest spice producers on the planet but I guess that's not good enough.  If you want a rational debate that's fine but one side has to answer the questions and you have not been and frankly it seems to me you are laughing at the links because there is no other reason for you not to understand.  BTW if I am going to make a southwestern dish I do not plan on using chile powder but rather chili powder as chile powder is other herbs but if I am going to make chili con carne I am going to use chile powder as it has other spices that are needed for chili con carne.  I am trying to understand why you are fighting this because I done everything you asked me to do on this and gave links to several companies.  Would having a link a business that makes and markets these products not be a good enough to state yes there is a difference. Mihsfbstadium (talk) 22:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Every time you give a link that is not a good ref, I'll ask for refs. Every time you give a published, reliable source, I'll be satisfied. Please have a good look at WP:Reliable sources and you'll see what WP demands. The problem is not what your links say nor how many you provide, it is the kind of links they are: a hundred links that are not refs still means we have no refs. Also, if you produce refs that are contradicted by equally good refs, which do we follow? Richard New Forest (talk) 20:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Further research
I've done some more research, and I think I've changed my view somewhat. I'll go through all the links you've provided, and summarise what they do say (I suggest you read the following after having checked WP:RS): Links given in article (also yours I think): Now the links I found before (these are generally no better in quality than yours, but do illustrate that there is a spectrum of views): And some more (same comment as before):
 * Transcript of Alton Brown TV show, Chile's Angles. States that "chili powder" is a blend used for chile con carne, and "chile powder" is powdered chillies.  Consistent use of spelling.  Transcript of light-hearted, jokey show.  Does not give its own sources.
 * Purcell Mountain Farms Lists many types of powdered chilli, and one chilli powder blend.  Uses "chile" spelling for both, and advises use of both in various sorts of cooking, including both for chilli con carne.  Advertising site.
 * McCormick A chilli powder blend with cumin and oregano.  Advises use for chilli con carne, adding more cumin.  Uses "chili" spelling for both fruit and blend.  Advertising site.
 * Clay's Kitchen. Describes "chili powder" as different from "ground red chile" in lead section, but in lists of different recipes for blends uses "chili" for the fruit several times.  Seems authoritative, or at least confident, but self-published site giving none of its sources.
 * Texas cooking Recipe for blended chilli powder. Spelling "chili powder", "chile" for the fruit.  Recommends use in a particular chilli con carne recipe, or "any good recipe that relies heavily on chili powder" (not clear if this is restricted only to chilli con carne).
 * Fiery Foods Uses term "chile powder" but does not define it.  Uses both "chile" and "chili" spellings for the fruit.  Self published.
 * Foodista Gives recipe for "chile powder" as a blend; uses same spelling for fruit. No indication of use.  Wiki, not giving source.
 * Big Oven Gives recipe for "chile powder" as a blend; uses same spelling for fruit.  No indication of use.  User-contributed material, not giving source.
 * Fiery Foods.com Recipe for chilli powder blend to be used for barbecues: uses "chile" spelling for both powder blend and fruit. Self-published site; recipe credited to non-published source.
 * Rosemary.com Describes single ingredient as being either a blend or powdered chillies.  Recommends both for all uses, including chilli con carne.  Uses "chilli" spelling for both.  Information page on advertising site (but not selling spices).
 * Chilli Pepper Company Lists "chilli powders", and defines these as powdered chilli. Also lists "chili con carne spice blend" (also spelling it as "chilli con carne spice blend"), specifically recommended for chilli con carne; also recommends a blend of three different powdered chillies for chilli con carne.  Advertising site.
 * Schwartz Describes chilli powder blend as suitable for chilli con carne and other recipes.  Spelling consistently "chilli" for both blend and fruit (except for page title, which uses "chili").  Advertising site.
 * Wise Geek "What is chili powder" States that "chili powder" is a blend of powdered chilli and other spices. Suggests using for curries, steak, fish and hamburgers (but does not mention chilli con carne).
 * Wai Yee Hong Chilli powder extra hot Describes "chilli powder" as ground chillies. Advertising site.
 * All Recipes Describes "chili powder" as a blend, "chile powder" as powdered chillies.  Recipe site: does not include source.
 * Wikibooks Cookbook: Chili powder Describes "chili powder" as a blend used for chilli con carne; spells the fruit as "chile".  Wiki, no sources.
 * Wikibooks Cookbook: Chile States that "Chile, chili, and chilli are ambiguous terms that generally all mean the same thing", then lists chilli peppers, chilli powder (as a blend) and chilli con carne.  Does not distinguish between spellings.  Wiki, no sources.

I have several conclusions from all this, and actually I think I'm now a good bit more sympathetic to your view, though not convinced yet. My conclusions are: Overall, there is a tradition which uses chilli powder blends rather than pure powdered chilli for making chilli con carne, and this tradition sometimes (but not always) distinguishes the dish from the fruit by spelling. Other traditions do not make these distinctions.
 * Usage is not consistent, and it is very clear that no-one can safely be dogmatic about the meaning of any of the terms involved. There are differences between North American and British usage, and also differences within North America both in use of spices and in spelling.
 * In US usage, "chili" is the normal term for chilli con carne. A spice mix used for this is commonly called "chili powder" in the US (is the logic "powder for making chili con carne"?).
 * In US usage, the fruit is called either "chili" or "chile". "Chili" can mean either the fruit or the dish, while "chile" is normally used only for the fruit.
 * In the US, a chilli spice blend is commonly used for making chilli con carne, but pure powdered chilli may also be used.
 * In British usage (and related cultures such as Indian), "chilli" is normally used both for the fruit and the dish. "Chilli powder" normally means powdered chilli, and a blend will normally be called something like "chilli spice blend".  Either may be used for making chilli con carne.
 * Not one of the above links (on either side) is a reliable source for anything except that culinary and spelling usage is varied: so far this is the only fact we can prove. We really need refs from books.

The question is, do we describe one particular US usage and exclude others, or do we try to cover all usages? WP:WORLDVIEW gives a useful discussion on this.

Is one particular US usage different enough to warrant two articles? Is one rather inconsistent US usage enough to distinguish these articles by spelling alone? How would we justify describing only one tradition as if it applied US-wide and worldwide? Perhaps you could give these points some thought and respond to them. Richard New Forest (talk) 20:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Personally I feel that we need to use the American English for this article. I say this not because I am an American but simply the spice and the dishes that this is used for comes from the Southwest of America and is more in vogue.  Now it does not mean we can not have TRUE English in the articles either but as a secondary language spelling.  Now given that I agree some people on the web do not hold the usual commercial view of the spice spellings.  That is fine and its their choice but remember its their view not the commercial view which I think an article needs to reflect.  If I go into a store I want to know that when I go into the spice isle I get what I really need not something different.  If commercial sites are willing to hold a standard spelling which I feel they have done so because most of the sites I have visited show that then that is the standard we should role with.  Now as the differences yes you can use both in chili con carne but remember that if you use chili powder not chile powder you will not need to add additional spices to make the taste correct for chili.  Now tamales on the other hand should not use chili powder because of the said spices in it but rather chile powder because it is pure heat.  Chili powder in my mind is nothing more than a time saver for the cook when it comes to spicing chili con carne.  It is the same as curry powder for Indian dishes.  Most Indian cooks have their own curries which they make up ahead of time just to save time over the course of many weeks.  Now again Alton does show that in one of his more recent shows.  So again I consider chili powder more of a curry for texmex food than anything else.  I prefer the commercial stuff in my cooking simply because handling chile powder is not fun for your nose.  Once that stuff goes airborne forget it!  Hehe.  I may have to take a trip to the library and see if Alton put anything related to the difference in his first cookbook.  I do know his 2nd will not have anything as its just baking.  I will get back to you tomorrow I hope.
 * As for Alton on using him for this right now is that first he uses a lot of resources in his shows. Second he is very open to providing transcripts and what not to his fan page as evidence by the info provided on that site.  Another is he has used multiple real world folks in his shows like Deb Duchon (sp), several CDC folks, and I can't think of her name who first showed up in the Onion show of season 1.  All of them are very knowledgeable and have the background to prove it.  BTW if you happen to come across the strawberry episode those folks with Deb in the forest are her students.  As for his show he stated back when he was thinking about creating it he wanted to combine Monty Python, Mr Wizard, and Julie Child all into one show.  If you think its campy its the Monty Python in the show.  The Mr. Wizard part of the show is what I love about it and what keeps me interested but I do like the Python of the show.  Now I got that from his 10th Anniversary show that he spoke about it.  If you have an hour to kill that provides a good basis of what he does for the show.  BTW all of his shows are on Youtube save for a few recent shows.  Mihsfbstadium (talk) 08:06, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Are you going to provide any further refs?


 * As I've clearly shown, even American usage rarely makes a distinction between the two versions by spelling. Richard New Forest (talk) 11:06, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Compromise proposal
No further comments for some time. I therefore propose the following, which I think accommodates all views while avoiding confusing article titles: If there are no more comments for a week or so, I'll implement this. Richard New Forest (talk) 09:26, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep two articles for the moment. Personally I don't think there is any real justification for this, but nor does it do any real harm.
 * Rename both articles to make it obvious what they cover. It is clear from the links discussed above that there is no consistent difference in spelling between the two types, and so spelling cannot be used as the only distinction.  I suggest Powdered chili and Chili powder blend.  These are clear, they are both terms in regular use, and both use their commoner American spelling (both articles are already written in American English, so "chilli" is out...).  Each article will of course continue to have cross-referencing hatnotes.  Chile powder would become a redirect (as it has only one meaning); Chili powder could be a redirect to either article, or it could be a short dab.


 * Move to chili powder blend done. Parallel move of chile powder to powdered chili is blocked by a redirect: admin move requested.  Richard New Forest (talk) 21:31, 10 November 2010 (UTC)