Talk:Mug

Tiki mugs is advertising
The reference to Tiki mugs is advertising for the company https://www.vantiki.com It should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.255.184.60 (talk) 06:06, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Images of mugs with regional or Wikipedia elements
Please can we find a mug that doesn't feature Australia or in fact any country/regional-specific elements, unless of course such regions/countries are relevant to the article. However, seen as Australia is irrelevant to mugs, it is bad editing to have the country incorporated into a country-nuetral article. Rfwoolf 01:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the mug showing images of Australia to comply with the NPOV (Neutral Point of View) policy encouraged by Wikipedia. I have replaced it with a mug featuring the Wikipedia logo. While I prefer this mug, and find it more neutral and clean and simple, we could possibly find even an even better mug with a better angle in the shot, to shows how liquids/beverages can be contained in the mug. Rfwoolf 13:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * ??? I don't care much about the image, but please explain what point of view the other mug was espousing. I don't see how WP:NPOV applies at all.  On the other hand WP:SELF might apply, but actually I think it's amusing to have WP on the mug. —johndburger 03:17, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * * Okay, guilty. I haven't wikiread every single wikipolicy on this very wikipedia. But I will say that Wikipedia is supposed to be international, and where possible and feasible, not having a bias towards or against any particular country. The measuring system for example, should be metric, even though Wikipedia is originally American and has a large American audience. I found that the mug featuring Australia (and the name of an Australian resort) on it to be liability to Wikipedia. Maybe somewhere there's a wikipolicy against featuring business names in images or content where it's not relevant to the article. Or, maybe there's a wikipolicy against branding international objects with a certain country. Mugs are seen all over the world, and I found it sacracinct to see an Australian mug on such an article. Next thing we'll see combs with the Australian flag, or a towel with the Italian flag on it, or saucers with the Brazillian logo,-- you get the point. Rfwoolf 11:21, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * * As far as WP:SELF applies, I do agree that it may be an issue, but so far having read the article I think it doesn't really apply -- it was referring to mostly the prose and text in the article and not so much an image within it. I do think we can find a better image out there (see my comment above), but so far I'm quite happy with this one. Rfwoolf 11:21, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

"Polite Society"
This article mentions "In polite society".

What, pray tell, is that?

If it is indeed something, perhaps we could have a link. Rfwoolf 08:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Rfwoolf. It is an elitist term used by a certain section of English society to place themselves above the majority. In my opinion it has no place in the article.ThanxTheriac 14:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Image
Hi all. Is it definite that the mug is porcelain? It looks more like a design commonly made of earthenware. I know only a minor point but perhaps changing porcelain to ceramic would be better. ThanxTheriac 14:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and you're right. I've taken out porcelain. Feel free to better if you can. Rfwoolf 14:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Rfwoolf. Thanks, I have expanded the description as best as it possibly could be without information from whoever made the mug or photographed it. ThanxTheriac 15:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

O-shaped ring
This article says: ''Secondly, an indented base separates the beverage from the surface upon which the mug is set. The form of the base is what produces the characteristic O-shaped stain, so often seen upon desks and documents.''

Should we perhaps have an image of this?

Rfwoolf 07:06, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Tasse and Demitasse
We need to look into this nonsense very carefully. I early removed the link of Tasse which linked to a font -- so I assume that Tasse is a foreign word (please check the English Dictionary) -- and yet Demitasse remains linked to an article (which means it wasn't vandalism).

I've never heard of either, but that's not to say they don't exist, or that parts of the world indeed don't have such cups.

If anyone can enlighten us, please do! Rfwoolf 04:35, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know a 'tasse' is a pot of tea in german? 86.52.87.137 16:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

coffee cup
on the disambiguation page for coffee cup, coffee cup links to mug. Then this article on the mug refers to a coffee cup as something else. Please fix this!--199.243.252.196 17:02, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes you will see on the talk page for coffee cup I made a note on February that not all coffee cups are mugs. You are correct.
 * The truth is that a coffee cup can refer to a "coffee cup", a "tea cup" and/or a "mug". Strictly speaking the article should focus on cups known as "coffee cups" whose main purpose are containing cups of coffee.
 * So I think this needs to happen: The coffee cup article needs to not be a disambiguation page and contain a stub about coffee cups and mention both mug and teacup.


 * I'm going to go ahead and make these changes. Feel free to contribute or chip in if you disagree.


 * Sidenote: I remember a few years ago if I ordered a cup of coffee they'd say "Do you want it in a cup or in a mug?" and they would charge you an extra 50c (in South Africa) for a mug.


 * That's my story and I'm sticking to it.


 * Rfwoolf 14:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Beakers
I have never heard the use as mentioned in this article. If "beaker" meaning coffee cup is a regional term then it should say so. Personally, I think it should be removed entirely. Apologies for not signing my post correctly; I can't remember my user name.

Wiktionary
I'm pretty sure that this article has all the unsourced and unverifiable tags because it is a defenition rather than an encyclopedia article. Dayleyj 03:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Some references (bear with me - I know these may not be usable references): www.india-crafts.com/earthenware/mug.html

http://m-ware.com/faq.cfm

It's good to start some kind of collection, even if can't use 'em.

Rfwoolf 14:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC) I think this article goes beyond what one would expect to find in a dictionary definition, for example when telling us the amounts of fluids held by cups as opposed to mugs. 81.133.110.208 (talk) 12:27, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Image
The image is self-referencing and may break WP:ASR. We should use a different pic of a mug. D-Fluff has had E-Nuff 19:00, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I hear you, and on the one hand it could possibly be breaking WP:ASR, on the other hand I feel strongly that it doesn't. WP:ASR speaks about the prose and text of articles. It would be wrong for an article to refer to Wikipedia in its text unless Wikipedia was directly relevant (such as an article ABOUT an aspect of Wikipedia). But the image is not text, and the article otherwise doesn't mention Wikipedia. Compromise suggestion: Given the doubt, I agree we should perhaps opt for an image that doesn't have the Wikipedia logo, but last time I looked I didn't find any decent image - the previous one was of an Australian company -- I was more loathed to have that included than to have a mug of Wikipedia. In addition I think it's quite pleasing to include Wikipedia in this case, after all Wikipedia does try to sell those mugs. As a compromise, if anyone can find a decent picture of a mug, that doesn't brand anything, I'd be quite happy to see a different image. Rfwoolf 10:57, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

The point of WP:ASR is that we should not use wording or other content that becomes meaningless when copied verbatim to another setting or medium (such as answers.com or a print encyclopedia). I do not see how the wikipedia mug voilated that; it did not become more or less meaningful due to the incidental fact that the logo is that of the community that currently publishes the article with the image in it. However, since the matter seems to cause contention, I have now spent a few minutes with a digital camera and a plain mug from my kitchen shelves. Whether the result is "decent" I will not try to judge. Feel free to revert. –Henning Makholm 19:51, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Good work, and your comments about WP:ASR are very well put. However, personally, I prefer the previous image. Regardless, it's probably best to keep the one you've put, so I'm not going to revert you - although I do think we should make the image slightly bigger, if possible. I'll see if I can set that. Rfwoolf 14:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

How much does a mug hold?
Errr... can someone give the average storage capacity of these mugs (standard cylandrical ceramic/porcelain types). Does it hold 120mL? Thanks in advance! 67.170.100.48 (talk) 20:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC)


 * "These" mugs? The article is about mugs in general, not just about a particular group of mugs.
 * The one in the picture can hold slightly more than 300 ml. An unscientific survey of mugs immediately available to me shows capacities ranging from 250 ml to 325 ml. I have owned smaller ones yet, which from memory I'd estimate at 175–200 ml. –Henning Makholm 23:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The average "cup" is 250ml (in baking if it says "add two cups of water" it means 2 x 250ml). So a mug is probably slightly larger than that, but should always be more than about 250ml. Of course, you do get different size mugs. Rfwoolf (talk) 23:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Mug amp mic position
I've added on a sentence about the mugs useage as a mic position —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.46.157 (talk) 22:50, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * What is a mic position? I wasn't able to find an article that describes this (or on Google either). . . Clarification might be needed.  The article on amplifiers doesn't mention this either. . .  131.151.209.237 (talk) 01:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

"Mug's game"
I was looking for explanation on "mug's game", but no trace in Wikipedia. What I have found is this nice link:. --193.99.214.134 (talk) 14:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Image
The red "travel mug" is a Stelton domestic vacuum flask .94.145.236.194 (talk) 17:00, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Image altered to Travel Mug from Wiki Commons, as existing image is not a travel mug Brugo (talk) 16:10, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed edits to thermal Mug text (request for inclusion, further to reversion)
I have also offered the following textual additions that have been reverted.

The travel mug has come a long way in since the 1980's - essentially keeping pace with the coffee-to-go market. The mug's thermodynamics (temperature retention) have evolved from thick walls of plastic/glass/metal to integral vacuum sealed manufacturing methods that retard temperature loss or gain to several hours. This has been driven by both consumer demands and improvements in manufacturing technology against a background of reducing manufacturing costs.

Most quality travel mugs no longer need handles as the mug itself is never hot to the touch – so the shape and form of travel mugs have changed significantly. The most recent development in travel mugs is a further consumer lead demand for mugs that are not just spill resistant but 100% leakproof.

I accept the comments that the text is insufficiently referenced and will resolve that. Brugo (talk) 12:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Reference found: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3325093/Cool-cup-that-makes-boiling-tea-fit-to-sip.html 80.6.233.88 (talk) 13:45, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Mug. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://ceramicstoday.com/articles/puzzle_mug.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:04, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2017
can you make the section where it says usually used for hot drinks to always used for hot drinks so i can win an argument just temporarily MerlinZeMagyk (talk) 23:20, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * No. Please don't waste our time  Velella  Velella Talk 23:21, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mug. 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/20100719162453/http://www.nicks.com.au/Index.aspx?link_id=76.623 to http://www.nicks.com.au/index.aspx?link_id=76.623
 * Added archive https://memate.com/ to http://www.thomaslayton.org.uk/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=41
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120927082915/http://www.nicks.com.au/index.aspx?link_id=76.633 to http://www.nicks.com.au/index.aspx?link_id=76.633
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100719162453/http://www.nicks.com.au/Index.aspx?link_id=76.623 to http://www.nicks.com.au/index.aspx?link_id=76.623

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) 22:09, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't think the "average" mug holds 12oz.
I'm pretty sure a "typical" mug in the US holds around 8-10 oz a coffee. They aren't twice the size of a tea cup, they are between 1.25 and 1.5X the size. A soda can holds 12oz; a standard drinking glass in my kitchen holds 12oz. A typical mug doesn't hold a whole can o soda, and a drinking glass only barely does it. Just to see, I took a normal sized mug from my kitchen, identical to the most commonly seen ones around this region (New England) and poured a can of soda into it. Brimming at the very top of the mug with soda (which I don't think is how cup capacity is measured), there is a still a small amount of liquid left in the can. That seems like 10oz to me, maybe 11 (which is unlikely. Around here a 12oz mug is a "large" mug, and a 16 oz is "jumbo". Oh, and here's a place selling "Standard sized Coffee cups and mugs (10oz.)" http://www.thecoffeebrewers.com/stsicocucomu.html. Maybe just say "8-12oz", but 16oz is apparently popular as well. AnnaGoFast (talk) 05:32, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mug. 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/20080509085958/http://www.sarabonnymanpottery.com/moss_scuttle.htm to http://www.sarabonnymanpottery.com/moss_scuttle.htm

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) 17:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Tankard
I was watching the 1968 film The Boscombe Valley Mystery, wherein Sherlock Holmes ordered a tankard of cider. When it arrived, I thought, "That's a mug." I came to wikipedia to discover the difference between mugs and tankards. From the respective articles, they appear to be the same thing. Yet neither article mentions the other. That doesn't seem appropriate somehow.