Talk:Humbug (sweet)

Poor references
The first two references - - "The Oxford companion to food" and "The Glutton's Glossary" - - point to "Google Books" which only show details about the books, themselves; nothing about "Humbugs." As such, they are useless. However, I am reluctant to remove them without something to replace them. Skaizun (talk) 04:03, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Etymology
The article claims that the name has no connection with the use of "humbug" to mean "sham" or hoax, etc. (as in "Bah, humbug!"). No evidence is offered, and it frankly seems highly unlikely that there's no connection at all. As the etymology of the term is unknown, it's hard to see what basis there could be for the claim that there's no connection; the O.E.D. includes both uses under the same head. --87.114.176.43 (talk) 14:03, 25 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The claim that the name of the sweet is unrelated to the Humbug that denotes falsity is uncited. Further, no other explanation is offered for the name of the sweet. It's 30 months since you posted to the talk page, so I'm going to delete the uncited claim.


 * MrDemeanour (talk) 15:38, 14 September 2021 (UTC)


 * And I deleted the whole paragraph. It's all uncited.


 * I think I see why the claim is there; it's because someone wants to talk about popular culture references to humbugs at Christmas. They're disavowing any suggestion that Scrooge was referring to sweets, by asserting the opposite.


 * Well, the lede is for summarising content from the body. None of that stuff appears in the body. The pop cultural references should go in their own section.


 * 15:46, 14 September 2021 (UTC)