Talk:Dunking (biscuit)

Offtopic comment/joke. NOT a recomentation
"the equation was published in almost every major UK newspaper. The journalists who published it took great care to get it right, some telephoning several times to check".

Ha Ha, I get it, a journalist actualy tried to get someting right —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.228.125.145 (talk) 08:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

Thanks, Wikipedia!
I just came across this article while drinking a cup of coffee, and went and fetched my ginger biscuits and started dunking. Mmmmmmm, delicious! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.109.62.228 (talk) 17:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Best biscuits for dunking in tea
Readers of this page might like to know that this website:

http://www.jamieoliver.com/recipes/member-recipes/Top%20ten%20biscuits%20to%20dunk%20in%20tea/4176

lists the Top Ten biscuits for dunking in tea. Should they be included in the article? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:05, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

And in case you are curious, the ten listed on the website are:

1- Hobnobs 2- Chocolate Hobnobs 3- Ginger nuts (maybe a shock number three but for me the real deal) 4- Digestives 5- Chocolate digestives 6- Custard creams 7- Rich Tea (double dunk is even better) 8- Bourbon biscuits 9- Shortbread 10- Chocolate chip cookies (11)- Penguin bars (A personal favourite) More Sharing ServicesShare Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on googlebuzz Share on facebook_like

Good to see that ginger nuts are up there, although I was quite shocked to see Penguin_(biscuit) there - I never thought any one ever dunked those. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I personally think it's worth including at least a reference to this.

At the same time I have no idea why Tim Tams are not listed, in the place where the most common biscuit for dunking is put because the Australian biscuit is one of the most famously dunked in the world. every Australian you meet will tell you about them when you are drinking your coffee or tea Richardhod (talk) 11:14, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

I wish I knew how to edit on mobile because I immediately afterwards saw that Tim tams are mentioned earlier in the article. But it would be good to have a quick reference to them in the the country list just because people may not refer to the earlier part, as i didn't. And completeness in this section would be nice Richardhod (talk) 11:17, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

The techniques are outstanding!
I'd like to recommend these fantastic techniques, as I was growing bored of the usual "Fracture Technique" as mentioned in the article. The amount of various biscuit-related dunks are astounding, and they have really helped me improve my tea and biscuit routine and can now confirm I am gradually becoming more adapted to the intermediate guide! Thanks guys!

___cjr___ (talk) 19:57, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

UK opinion divided?
I don't know, but the teashop that outlawed it in 2007 isn't a good example, as it also "The stringent rules at the Tea Cosy Rooms include not putting your elbows on the table, not insulting the Queen, never handling sugar cubes and not sipping from teaspoons. Visitors are advised that their little fingers should not point into the air, tapping a teaspoon against a cup and using a mobile phone is banned outright." We can't use that as an example for this anymore than we could use it as an example for saying opinion on handling sugar cubes or pointing little fignres into the air is divided. Doug Weller (talk) 14:34, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed - the website for the Tea Cosy Rooms advertises itself as eccentric and quirky - the 'ban' is just an advertising gimmick (one that seems to have worked). I'll re-word that sentence until better citations come to light. sheridan (talk) 13:42, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dunking (biscuit). 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/20110929141349/http://www.arte.tv/fr/connaissance-decouverte/karambolage/Cette-semaine/Emission-du-13-Juillet-2008/2106110,CmC=2107242.html to http://www.arte.tv/fr/connaissance-decouverte/karambolage/Cette-semaine/Emission-du-13-Juillet-2008/2106110,CmC=2107242.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:34, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Request other editors' help
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

We have a disagreement with Drmies regarding the existence of Cultural references section. He keeps on removing it, instead of improving it, and claming it's useless. My point of view is that it is useful, and if necessary, it should be improved, rather than removed.

Furthermore, if the author of "trivial mentions" reads this, could you kindly amend your contribution to Drmies satisfaction?

Below is our exchange of messages. Please, share your point of view. Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Dunking (biscuit). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards. If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Two things: you reinserted unverified and trivial information, and you didn't even bother to explain. Drmies (talk) 02:00, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Drmies, I regret to write this, but your claims are not substantiated. The text you are trying to remove is referenced. The article is about a popular ritual, which was reflected in films and novels. The fact that someone considers an article trivial, doesn't make it so. By removing the Cultural references section, you are impairing article comprehensiveness. If this explanation is comprehensible, please, revert your disruptive edit, or let me know what further details you may need. (George6996 (talk) 03:40, 20 November 2022 (UTC))

Don't be silly. It's exceedingly trivial, poorly written ("toast" has to be linked? "could seem like an odd choice" is original research, "as an heiress" is original research, etc.) and it is not well sourced. IMDB is not an acceptable source, "citation needed" means it's not sourced. Stop wasting peoples' time please. Your explanation is comprehensible but faulty. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:06, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Drmies, if you do not like how an article is written, you may improve it, instead of removing other people's efforts to provide a comprehensive view. It is the ‎Cultural references, that made me find this article and by removing them you prevent visitors from having this opportunity. I understand that erasing is easier than writing, but you may try to be more productive than destructive. Thank you. George6996 (talk) 00:20, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

The article is fine; it's your trivia that's bothersome. Removing trivial mentions = article improvement. Drmies (talk) 00:50, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

George6996 (talk) 01:23, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Correction: I am improving it by removing totally trivial pop culture references sourced to IMDB and worse. For those interested, I suggest you look at the warnings on the user's talk page: better formatting. Drmies (talk) 13:22, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * You also don't seem to be improving the contested content. The existing sourcing is poor and each cultural reference isn't written in a way which relates it to the rest of the article or gives the reader more information about the subject. SailingInABathTub 🛁 14:26, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * you are absolutely right. This is not my content and I don't feel qualified to improve it. In this case, I'm defending somebody else's work. I don't mind it being improved - just would not like to see it removed. Maybe the contested content should be there with an edit request clearly articulating what and how should be changed? George6996 (talk) 17:55, 4 November 2023 (UTC)