Talk:Derby pie

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 January 2019 and 3 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Gotham Rejex.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Explaination of tags
Thanks-- Birgitte SB  18:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * notability This tag is about notability.  It hard to judge if this product is notable with the current reference given.   Better references would help. You could also ask User:FlagSteward who placed the tag for an explanation.
 * primarysources This tag is about the quality of references. There are no third-party sources in the references.  Please add such a source before removing this tag.
 * advert This tag is about tone. The article reads like a sales pitch not an encyclopedia. "Popular additions are butterscotch, caramel, and other types of nuts." sounds like what would be on written on a menu. You could also ask User:FlagSteward who placed the tag for an explanation.
 * You know, that took a while to type out... I'm sure you could have worked on or fixed one or more of the problems you mentioned in that time. Articles get improved by people improving them... just declaring what needs to be improved is more annoying than productive in the vast majority of cases. Explaining what popular additions are is encyclopedic, saying what ones are good or what brands make good toppings would be an advertisement. --W.marsh 19:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I have spent a good deal of time the past few months finding references for articles that were tagged with Unreferenced in June of 2006. I decided to take one day this month and investigate the articles being tagged this month, before the category got unbearly large, and make an effort to educate the people connected with these articles.  I think spending one day a month educating people about the referencing issues I deal with myself the rest of the month will pay dividends in the long run. I am quite confident in my productivity in general, and in taking the time to educate today.. Some people are instantly grateful, others ignore me, and a few need further explanations to see the large picture.  Thank you for finding the newspaper reference. -- Birgitte  SB  21:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Honestly, your one day of the month would probably be spent educating the people who add the tags in lieu of making an effort to improve articles. Even at the most cursory glance there are hundreds of references someone could have added, but they chose to attack the article with ugly tags instead. For the record, I deeply appreciate anyone who actually improves articles and works on thankless backlogs... which you say you are, so I'll take you at your word and thank you for it. --W.marsh 21:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

U.S. and UK "Derby Pies"
Given there's a UK version of a "Derby Pie", there should be a separate article for that. However, this article cannot be renamed to "American Derby Pie" because that would not be its name. However, you can disambiguate it like "Derby Pie (U.S.)" or some other disambiguating word in parens. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 16:36, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Best I can figure a "UK derby pie" is some sort of meat pie or pot pie? Hard to tell since when you google derby pie almost every reference is to the subject of this article - a chocolate confection that sounds a whole lot better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.16 (talk) 12:33, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Trade Marks?
Despite the information presented on this page, I can find no record of the granting of 'Derby Pie' as a Trade mark. The US Patent office shows (http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:pw8g6h.2.2) the mark 'Derby-Pie' (with a hyphen) as being now owned by Alan Rupp of Kentucky. The addition of a hyphen - as in 'Derby-Pie' - is commonly an indication that a trade mark was refused and then re-applied for claiming that the hyphenated version is a different mark. The record of court cases is also typical of dubious claims.

Generally speaking, Trade Marks will not be granted for 'mere descriptions' or for place-names, so I would not expect that 'Derby Pie' would be allowed. Glynhughes (talk) 17:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The link shows that "Derby-Pie" is a live trademark. The article is named "Derby Pie" because that's what it seems to be commonly called, and I assume that "Derby Pie" would be seen as an obvious variant, legally speaking.  Stevie is the man!  Talk • Work 17:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Why does this topic even exist as a page promoting the particular trademark of "Derby-Pie"? This page contains only references to the trademark, not the general idea/recipe of a nut & chocolate-based pie which people from the Louisville area often call Kentucky Derby pie or anything like it.

Why not have a separate topic for the purported trademark and their efforts to defend it? WoodenAxle (talk) 01:16, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Derby Pie Salmonella
Indeed, the original Derby Pie (see http://www.foodsofengland.co.uk/Derby_Pie.htm ) is of special significance. It is a type of 'Trunk Pie', a pastry casing originally developed as a way of keeping meat fresh. It doesn't always work, and a strain of Salmonella first identified in a Derby Pie is designated 'Derby Pie Salmonella'

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2167419/

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=37RYAAAAYAAJ&q=derby+pie+salmonella&dq=derby+pie+salmonella&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi4rrS86YvLAhXHSiYKHX4ND-AQ6AEIKzAD

etc Glynhughes (talk) 17:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)


 * OK, but as discussed above, this is a separate subject and therefore should have its own article. How this article is named is separate from that.  We can always disambiguate if necessary.  Stevie is the man!  Talk • Work 17:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
 * If this pie combines chocolate and pork, then one would think salmonella would be the least of your problems... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.16 (talk) 12:24, 9 March 2016 (UTC)