Talk:Potato chip/Archive 1

Cited
I cited the George Crum part. It was written by Mary Bellis her credentials are worthy as source.

Forbes Best of the Web credits Mary for creating the number one online destination for information about inventors and inventions. Her writing has been reprinted and referenced to in numerous educational books and articles. Her opinion and advice is requested by media outlets on a constant basis. In addition, she has produced and directed a number of films, including a documentary on Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone, and has worked as a curator specializing in computer generated art.

The man is world renowned as the inventor of the chip.

Question
Gosh I hate to ask this - I'll look like a compulsive idiot. Oh, wait, I'm a regular contributor to an online encyclopedia, so obviously I'm compulsive. The 'idiot' part is up to individual judg(e)ment. what's the source for the first potato chip? Place? Person? It's always nice to have those connected to 'inventions.' Along with Mr. Crocker I'm opposed to lone inventors, and food based on easy concepts (slice potato thinly;  fry;  drain) is an excellent example of this! --MichaelTinkler, who needs to get something else to do with his life.

I've done a Google search and it turns out to be a great story:. George Crum, chef in Saratoga Springs, New York, was fed up with a customer who continued to sent his fried potatoes back, because they were too thick. So Crum decided to slice the potatoes so thin that it couldn't be eaten with a fork. Against Crum's expectation the guest was ecstatic about the chips. -- Tsja


 * a tasty etiological myth (and set within 100 miles of my current location!). I suppose we can accept the lone invetor for now.--MichaelTinkler
 * I've heard that stroy on nickelodeon--60.226.29.20 00:23, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

- And snopes.com, which is pretty harsh on myths like this, declares this one true. I trust them, based on other things I've seen from them in the past -- Paul Drye

Snopes is about as reliable a source as there is, I agree. --LDC


 * I'm very familiar with snopes, but I've had one hamless experience to show me that even there we cannot put down our guard. There was a story going around that a 1911 D. W. Griffith film called The Poseidon Adventure was being played in the second class lounge of the Titanic just before it went down.  I confess that I fell for the hoax.  I can't say that the snopes people themselves were responsible for this, but the article format was that used by snopes, and it included links to the Internet Movie Data Base for the various people purported to be involved in the movie.  Eclecticology
 * Snopes is in fact responsible for this...and in fact created the page (and the fake IMDb page) for the exact lesson you described...that we shouldn't let down our guard for even trusted sources of information. As for Crum inventing the potato chip, it'd probably take more investigation to get to the bottom of the origins... -- Grev -- Talk 10:16, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * I added a print reference from 1991 that confirms the origin story. -- Norvy (talk) 16:39, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oil/production method
I think a mention should be made about peanut oil chips, and other production types of chips (similar to peanut oil, but still yielding a different taste; sunflower oil). These types of chips are often said to be a bit healthier than regular vegetable oil potato chips. -- A-ixemy 18:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I cannot remember the guy in Tayto Crisps right now; I saw a programme about it on the History Channel a long time ago. I can try to ring the company next week and find out his name. (I know when his ashes were scattered on the sea, he asked that along with them a pack of Tayto crisps be scattered as well, as his innovation in discovering a way to flavour crisps made him, in terms of today's money, a multi-billionaire. From peeling potatoes with his wife and family in a small firm one day, to being offered blank cheques from top potato chip manufacturers in a matter of weeks, is a nice thought. JTD 05:12 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)

From http://web.ukonline.co.uk/m.gratton/Famous%20Men.htm


 *  Murphy - Joseph 'Spud' ..... born May 15th 1923 died 2001 ..... Irish entrepreneur who produced the world's FIRST cheese and onion flavoured crisps in the late 1950s. The new flavour was a huge success both at home and abroad and within two years the business moved to larger premises. His company Tayto was the FIRST company in Ireland to make and market so-called "extruded snacks"Mintguy

http://www.taytocrisps.ie/aboutus/about_history.asp. says he set the company up in 1954. Mintguy

Golden Wonder reckon they introduced flavoured crisps in 1962! http://www.goldenwonder.com/corp/ Mintguy


 * I just emailed Golden Wonder and told them their website is telling porkie pies. I wonder if I will get a reply. MintguyThanx. I should have guessed. The name 'Murphy' in Ireland is often nicknamed 'Spud'. (That was my old headmaster's nickname.) But I never realised that the name came from the guy who made all the millions and had American potato chip manufacturers queing on the street outside his house throwing figures out as to how much their company would pay to get their hands on his formula. Yeah. Golden Wonder and Tayto are like Coca Cola and Pepsi, forever trying to claim that they were first. But apparently Tayto were, according to RTÉ radio, the History Channel and the BBC. All I know is that Murphy revolutionised the whole process. One guy on the History channel said that before modern post-Murphy flavourings, a good potato chip tasted a bit like a stale fried potato slice, while most potato chips tasted like soggy cardboard. Then along came Murphy's innovation, and potato chips had an appeal to people who never would previously have touched potato chips because they weren't enamoured by the taste. JTD 05:48 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)


 * smile* they'll probably send you a thousand packs of the things! JTD 05:48 Feb 1, 2003 (UTC)

Is it true that all flavored chips include MSG? I haven't seen it listed on the two or three ingredients lists I have checked. Rmhermen 15:03, Nov 13, 2003 (UTC)


 * Many do. Burger Rings, I remember, does, but I wouldn't be 100% sure on others (gee, miss Burger Rings... ;) Dysprosia 10:40, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * I think almost all do. Look for "Flavour enhancer: E621" perhaps :-). And of course, MSG stands for monosodium glutamate. Do such additives have to be declared in the US though? (They do in Europe/EU) zoney &#09827; talk 18:14, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Yes, in the US, manufactures are required to indicate the ingredients used to make products, and they must be listed in the order of their concentration in the product. Lots of companies use MSG as a flavor additive, but there are also many that don't. --D.c.camero (talk) 19:47, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

- -- --In New Zealand according to Wikipedias New Zealand English page, they have hot chips, meaning French fries type potatoes, and cold chips meaning crisps. I get confused these days because I grew up in the UK, ate stacks of Tayto crisps while on holiday in Ireland, and now live in Canada where crisps are chips and chips are fries. As for flavor and flavour, its flavour. With a U. End of story.

Mintguy, shouldn' you change the text everywhere to read 'crisps', you Anglophilliac lap-dog? :-)

Flavoured/Flavored
Flavoured Crisps were invented in Ireland, where we speak Hiberno-English, which uses British spellings, so logically it should be Flavoured, and not Flavored.

Note that Tayto is a noun and not a proper noun here, they are that revered almost. "To buy some Tayto" just means buying crisps.


 * I'm going to keep fixing the spelling till I get banned, it seems. Being an obstinate bastard can be useful sometimes... Kiand 15:18, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * What a lame edit war. Using chips to mean crisps is obviously an American thing, so it's only logical that this article is in American spelling. You could say that the Irish guy "invented flavoured crisps", making it italic to make it obvious that the different spelling is intentional. Also, this article needs a prominent link to real chips at the top. Zocky 08:57, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

was the first addition of british spelling to the article. Before this, American english is used exclusivly. Therefore, according to Manual of Style, this article should use American spelling only. Gentgeen 09:21, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * oh, there should be a link to the disambiguation page chip at the top of the page. Gentgeen 09:23, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Seconded. Gentgeen is absolutely correct. &bull; Benc &bull; 20:35, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * 1) U.S. "(potato) chips" are what British and Irish folks call "(potato) crisps" (both expressions refer to those crispy potato wafer thingies).
 * 2) Irish/British "(potato) chips" are not ubiquitously known in the US. They are thick fried chunks of potatoes. "French fries" probably is the closest thing U.S. folks know that's comparable to Irish/British "chips". However the term "French fries" is also known in the UK/Éire, where it is used to specifically refer to the thin fried potato strips (to distinguish them from "proper" chips). To the British/Irish, "fries" is what you get at McDonalds whereas "chips" is what you get at your local take-away (often also called a "chipper".) (That's "chippy", at least in England -- Greg K Nicholson 15:02, 2005 Mar 15 (UTC))
 * 3) Since "flavour" is the British/Irish usage and "flavor" is U.S. usage it appears absolutely crystal to me that in an article on "potato chips" it can't say "flavour".

(Feel free to incorporate come of the above details/info into some article. I couldn't be arsed right now.) Ropers 00:21, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

As people seem to diagree on the spelling, then there should be some sort of ruling....a recent edit changed an English 'Brand name' - 'Hedgehog Flavour' to flavor. This is to me stupid by this logic you may as well change the name of the ruling political party in the UK to Labor... I don't care either way, lets keeps one spelling be it US or UK but lets not change brand names were they occur. Sorry forget to sign Geotek 23:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

US/UK
I suggest two separate articles. Crisp and potato chip. One may discuss the "chip"'s appearance in the US, and the other the origins of the Irish/UK "crisp". At the latter we may discuss flavoured crisps and Tayto to our heart's content. The US version can refer to the addition of flavoring, with a direction towards crisp.

Pringles etc. can be discussed at potato chip, as no sane individual considers them a "Crisp".

zoney &#09827; talk 09:32, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * The government calles Pringles "crisps", because they're not real chips. Oh, you said "sane", so that rules out the government. Nevermind.


 * Crisps. For the UK and Ireland definition, non-US  spellings and the word "crisps" used instead of "Chips". Also links to Potato Chips, if someone does want the US definition. I had suggested this last night but not actually carried it out. Kiand 12:46, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Please note that this was an off-hand suggestion on my part. Others may disagree with it and prefer not to have separate articles. One alternative is to have most of the content about the introduction of flavoured crisps at Tayto and merely refer to that article from within potato chip. This is most likely preferable to having separate US and non-US articles. zoney &#09827; talk 14:07, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I'd already said I was considering doing it on Darriens talk page.
 * Crisps can be many things, as I pointed out. Meanies aren't even close to being potatoes, or "chips" in form, but are often known as crisps. Same applies to Hula Hoops, etc.
 * Kiand 14:25, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Somebody added to the article that in North America, french fries are also known as "freedom fries". Must this be here? I think it's silly. And anyway, nobody calls them "freedom fries" anymore! Permission to delete it? --Munchkinguy 18:36, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

We have crisp sandwiches in the UK too! Great Briton 17:56, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

I was just watching the BBC show Top Gear (in the US on BBC America) and they made a reference to a "bag of chips," and from the context it was clear they were referring to crisps. Is this a usage that has crept into British English? Does "bag of chips" unambiguously refer to crisps in the UK? Just curious.Armandtanzarian (talk) 02:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * its called a bag of chips, though it tends to be wrapped in paper, and if it were on top gear they are probably among the least likely to use an american term of any TV programme in the UK. TC Murphy (talk) 23:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Without knowing a little more of the context one cannot say in the specific example (Chips (French fries) are traditionally sold in bags at a sea-side fish-and-chips restaurants), so when someone says they want 'a bag of chips' it could potentially mean either.
 * However, there are types of 'crisps' which are called 'chips' in the UK. They tend to be either Corn Chips (e.g. 'Tesco Value Tortilla Chips), premium brands, or brands specifically trying to sell promote themselves as American - e.g. Kettle Chips. [I'm looking at the Tesco website as I write this]. Tesco also sells 'Tesco Potato Chips', which are crisps in the shape of chips (French-fries!) --Neil (talk) 11:23, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Fish and chips in a "bag": http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_nIxsLmR-Zc0/SX0XsJ6htLI/AAAAAAAAFdw/7-XtnOmWVQE/s400/saag1.jpg Clearly, to anyone from the UK, this is what the Top Gear person would have been referring to. Anyway, we don't have bags of crisps, we have PACKETS of crisps. Guv2006 (talk) 08:50, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

What's with the fixation with crisps? There is little consistency? The entire planet calls them chips; two islands call them crisps. Make crisps a footnote! --62.1.106.59 (talk) 20:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I think your Wikipedia membership should be a footnote, for a mixture of xenophobia, inaccuracy, and flaming. For your information, more of the English speaking world than "two islands" call them crisps, and, anyway, if that WERE the case, those two islands have populations totalling some 65 million people (Britain and Ireand) or 80 million (Britain and Australia), reason enough to refer to both uses of terminology. Guv2006 (talk) 08:34, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

The current article photo appears to be of the British crisp - a natural product made by deep frying thin slices of real potato: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kartoffelchips-1.jpg. I would suggest that there is the difference between the crisp and the potato chip, the latter appearing to be made from deep fried modified potato paste, which produces something unnatural looking, such as this: http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/12/1206_transfats/image/potato_chips.jpg Guv2006 (talk) 08:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Settle spelling once and for all
To settle this dispute once and for all, people should use words that use non-region specific spelling. I'm going to reword this article so this dispute does not flair up again. -- AxSkov 02:44, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * It's not spelling, it's terminology. Guv2006 (talk) 08:40, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Photo
I'm a bit disappointed that the photo accompanying this article seems to be of Pringles brand snacks, which - due to their manufacturing method - are a poor representation of the typical potato chip (or crisp for that matter, 'seasoned' or not). I don't have any handy, or I'd submit a replacement myself. Anyone? Tverbeek 02:36, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * I'm not disappointed with the picture shown in the article, but I do believe that there could have been a better picture of the potato chipsRuthlm05 (talk) 00:42, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Wish Chips
I know of a myth where if you eat a chip that is folded over (a wish chip), you can make a wish. Has anyone else heard of this myth? If so, where do you live, and who did you hear it from. I am trying to pinpoint the origin of this myth. Accordiong to my mother, she invented the idea, but I'm not so sure. --Munchkinguy 20:43, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * She invented it, you sound so cute. It was a commonly assumed thing with everyone I know growing up, you had to fit the wish chip in your mouth and close your lips WITHOUT breaking the chip at all. You then had to think of a wish (usually with your eyes closed) then CRUNCH that chip and try and swallow it all. You couldn't tell anyone what your wish was or it wouldn't come true, naturally! The chip also, as mentioned, had to be a WHOLE chip. It isn't allowed to be broken at the corners or anything. Also those very small chips do not count it had to be at least a "normal" sized chip. Generally the bigger the chip the better chance you had of your wish coming true and the more unique that chip was. You would want to show your friends when you found a massive wish chip JayKeaton 20:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Anyone else think all mentions of "Wish Chips" should be removed? The term only brings up about 1000 hits on Google, and the vast majority of them are unrelated. Urizen123 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.58.247 (talk) 05:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know if "Wishing Chips" are relevant for an encyclopedia, but I'm pretty sure it's a global phenomenon; my childhood in Australia taught me that a chip with a big bubble had a wish inside the bubble, others in Canada have said that a chip that's folded over contains one. As long as the "popular culture" section is there, I figure this may as well be mentionned. M.Nelson (talk) 04:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

betrays-belies-reveals
Do Pringles chips "betray", "belie", or "reveal" their manufacturing method? I vote for belie: ''to give a false impression of. To present an appearance not in agreement with''

The key here is that a lot of people (including myself until I read this) assume Pringles are just cut from potates like other chips, and don't know they're made from a paste. Since they're shaped to look like traditional chips, I think they "belie" their unusual manufacturing process. They certainly don't reveal it -- if anything, they conceal it. And betray, as in treachery? I think this is someone confusing "betray" with "belie".

Splitting hairs, but oh well.


 * No, I would say "betray" (as in reveal despite the attempt to hide the process). Pringles are quite distinctive due to being made from powdered cardboard (yeah, reformed potatoes, whatever...). Anyone who mistakes one for a slice/sliver of potato needs a good look at the real thing.
 * zoney &#09827; talk 23:27, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I think it's pretty obvious to anyone who knows food, and the manufacturing of synthetic food, that Pringles are the product of a laboratory and a factory. They are so modified - and this includes their uniform shaping in order to fit into a can - that they barely taste like potatoes, let alone resemble them. I would go with "betray", as their uniform shape BETRAYS their origins as paste, and not fresh potato. Guv2006 (talk) 09:00, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

flavored sounds better than seasoned
Seasoned sounds really awkward and made Wikipedia sound really unprofessional. I have only changed one "seasoned" to flavored and will likely change the rest if noone objects. Flavored is chosen instead of flavored because the population of the US + Canada = 297M + 30M = 427M, while the population of UK + Australia is 60M + 20M = 80M. This indicates that the majority of first time English speakers would prefer "flavor". The margin is so great that this should be the case even when other commonwealth english speaking nations are added. And this doesn't even take into account the fact that Wikipedia is headquartered in the US. Also, the commonwealth countries have their own crisps article to mess around with, where they use flavoured!!! We North Americans shouldn't have to suffer the outrageous "seasoned" when the commonwealth nations use flavoured!
 * Canada generally follows British spelling, as do the huge numbers of people who speak English in India, etc... --Kiand 22:42, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay; I'll remove it.

Potato peeler invented by Herman Lay?
What is the source of this information? The biography page for the Frito Lay Company (http://www.fritolay.com/fl/flstore/cgi-bin/comp_hist.htm) says nothing about this invention. It mentions only his sales and marketing. Surely if he had invented something so significant, it would have been mentioned. ManoaChild 22:16, 25 July 2005 (UTC)


 * I believe this was entirely wrong; I have removed it. It was put into this article a long time ago (09:44, 27 March 2002) and has been sitting there.  A more complete bio of Lay at  makes it clear he did not invent the potato peeler at age 20 (or any time later).  -R. S. Shaw 07:55, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Crisps-Potato Chips, merger?
It sounds to me like they are the same thing, but they have 2 articles which mention no difference, should they be merged? 21:47, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * They're different. Crisps are often made from corn starch, or reprocessed potato starch, the americanised "potato chips" refers to stuff thats made from real potatoes. --Kiand 22:20, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Except that the "americanized" potato chips are called "Crisp" in other countries. --Munchkinguy 00:59, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * yes, but "crisps" ALSO refers to things which have never seen a potato in their lives. Potato Chips doesn't. Also, the company behind most of the major innovations in potato-or-cornstarch-based-savoury-products-in-a-bag (Tayto) refers to their entire product range genererically as "crisps". --Kiand 01:03, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

But only in English North America. I'm quoting this directly from the article:
 * In America, the de jure term for Pringles is "crisps", but they are rarely referred to as such. Conversely Pringles may be termed "potato chips" in Europe, to distinguish them from traditional "crisps".

--Munchkinguy 02:10, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

How about a disambiguation page instead? --Munchkinguy 02:12, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

They should me merged. The difference between the two is not clearly stated in the article and the reasons given here really haven't convinced me. violet/riga (t) 19:07, 17 October 2005 (UTC)


 * And there was me thinking Walkers crisps (the dominant brand of crisp in the UK) were made from potato slices... Seriously, why are there two articles? --Throup (talk) 17:55, 23 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Err...they are

Original Name
Back in the 1970s the Old Farmer's Almanac ran an article about the origin and gave the original name as "Saratoga Crisps." In addition, some online sources do, such as the Christian Science Monitor. It just sounds right to me. It's the way I always heard the story, and seems to be the way it's told in Saratoga Springs.

Should that part be changed here, or should both possibilities be mentioned? I do not think so, crisps are more british 8-)

Merging
'Crisps' (UK English) and 'potato chips' (US English) are two names for the same thing. The 'potato chips' article encompasses pretty much all of the content of the 'crisps' one and is more subtantial in other respects, so I propose that the 'crisps' article is merged into 'potato chips' and a redirect is put in place. There have been previous discussions on this, but it seems that there was no agreement so I've put a 'merge' header in to sort this out once and for all. --Smallbone10 23:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Please have a look at the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Crisps - it would be good to see other people's points of view. --Smallbone10 20:53, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, please merge. These are two names for the same food.  Badagnani 05:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * No, they're not, as "crisps" is often used to refer to corn-starch based products, which "potato chips" cannot be, for obvious reasons. --Kiand 08:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * No. Potato chips should be moved into crisps. Chips should disambiguate to crisps and fries.  Terms used shoudl be distinctive - chips is confusing with many meanings.--jrleighton 13:32, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * "No. Potato chips should be moved into crisps." - What he ses danr2k6 (talk) 01:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I support a merger. However, I would suggest that the resultant article be titled "Potato chips and crisps," with Redirects from the two existing pages. This should cover the objection that "crisps" cover a multitude of sins. B00P 17:42, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * B00P's suggestion strikes me as a workable compromise. Failing that, I would suggest that crisps be merged into Potato chips. Colonel Tom 21:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge under the name in most common use worldwide. Add disambiguation links of need be, but as chips and crisps are the same product, there's no justification for separate articles. ProhibitOnions 10:44, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

what source do you have that the US term is the most common usage? surely since it is in english it should reflect the proper term not that used in a regional dialect. TC Murphy (talk) 23:12, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Flavoured and flavored chips/crisps
Here is a suggestion for the sort of pathetic but fun exercise one can only find on the internet: compiling a list of the different types of flavoured chips/crisps that have been sold commercially. We all know about salt-and-vinegar, barbecue and so on, but what about hot dog, pizza and chicken wings? Lay's in Canada has just released wasabi-flavoured chips and curry-flavoured chips. Is there any interest in undertaking this project? Ground Zero | t 22:48, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The flavors section claim for popular flavors in China is bogus; when I was there last year, Lays and Pringles were selling such delights as toasted seaweed, roast barbeque pork, five spice fish, and spicy crab. Sun da sheng 05:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * These probably is. I am particularly interested in how flavours have appeared, disappeared or changed based on which addatives and flavourings have been introduced/banned over the years. Does anyone remember chocolate crisps? --JamesTheNumberless 13:27, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Chips, crisps, and fries
Potato chips is ambiguous.

Potato chips on the west of the Atlantic = potato crisps

Same on east side of the Atlantic = french fries.

So how about making Potato crisps the main article for the thin one, and make potato chips a disambig? --Christopherlin 06:31, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Apparently because that'll upset the Yanks. But you have a string point, crisps or potato crisps is the only international unambiguous term for potato chips --JamesTheNumberless 13:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * "Internationally unambiguous," you say? Do you have any evidence to support that claim? If "crisps" is so unambiguous, why have so many Usonians  never heard the term used as such? And if "chips" is so ambiguous, why is it used, in a vast majority of foreign languages, to refer to what you so dearly call "crisps"? Or does the answer to that escape you? (And apparently, the notion of making crisps the disambig upsets you Brits just as much, I'd say.) Mikhajlovich (talk) 11:38, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

"Chip butty" issue
From "In Recipes" section:
 * In the United Kingdom and Ireland, the "Potato Chip Sandwich" is more commonly know as a "Chip Buttie". Unlike its American counterpart the bread in the Chip Buttie is buttered, not covered in mayonnaise.

First, I've only ever seen it spelled "Butty". Second, a "Chip Butty" (at least north of Watford Gap, and as far as I know in the south too) is made with friggin' chips - hence the name. A sandwich made with crisps (potato chips, to Americans) is a crisp sandwich. Mayonnaise is optional. A sandwich made with chips (like thick french fries - about 1/3 inch across) is a chip butty, and may use butter according to taste but NEVER mayonnaise. I've edited the article to reflect this (be bold &c.) - if you change it back please at least say so here. Thanks. Tyrhinis 11:24, 20 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I was merely trying to illustrate that the Potato Chip Sandwich does exist as a slightly different variation to the original US recipe. I was not referring to a sandwich made with hot chips/french fries. It is unfortunate that you felt the need to be so angry in response to my addition to this page.
 * Kat 01:17, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I wasn't angry, sorry if you got that impression - it's just that the two delicacies really are completely different, and putting the butty in with the sandwich will just confuse people; the original edit made it sound as if the sole difference was the butter/mayo thing. Once more with pictures: a UK chip butty is made with these, and a US citizen's chip sandwich is made with these.


 * Again, if anyone's heard a Brit call a crisp sandwich a "chip butty" (or even buttie), speak now - or just change it, either's good...Tyrhinis 23:33, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Of course not, a chip buttie is made with chips, not crisps. The latter would be called a crisp sandwich.


 * The section on crisp sandwiches in general appears to be highly subjective and very poorly written, with reliance on localised brand names for description. --JamesTheNumberless 13:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree, the entire crisp sandwich section is very poorly written. In what sense is Vitalite a "student favorite" rather than any other butter/margarine when making crisp sandwiches? And how does this differ in any way from the Irish version (except for it being a branded margarine instead of butter)? 170.194.32.52 (talk) 12:11, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Picture
I agree with the person below, more on the famous story of the invention of chips, plus - what is that picture doing there? Surely the first (especially if it is the only) picture should show traditional crisps on their own, rather than some weird regional ones covered in sauce. Please CHANGE THE PICTURE. Saccerzd 19:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC) (something like this


 * I agree. If I get to the supermarket any time soon I'll buy a packet and take a new photo for the article. --Richmeister 11:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Canned Chips?
has anyone ever heard of canned potato chips. please contact me if so. here
 * Pringles makes canned chips. Jecowa 20:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Moon's Lake House
George Crumb was chef at Moon's Lake House, not the Moon Lake Lodge (there is no Moon Lake near Saratoga Springs) so I am changing the name.--Saxophobia 19:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Italicisation
Why is the word crisp italicised in the majority of places in the article? I thought when it starts an article with xxx or yyy then they're both meant to be valid terms. Italicising them is like saying "that crazy European English word". It certainly seems to have negative connotations in this context. - Рэд  хот  13:19, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, I see it the other way around - rather than Americans italicizing 'crisps' for being a "crazy European word", I would submit that it's actually the British who are italicizing the word to emphasize that it is the "right" or "proper" terminology. Besides, most people would put quotation marks around a word to give it that negative, "what a ridiculous word" connotation. Mikhajlovich (talk) 12:32, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

External reference - chip reviews
The actual reference notes 357 reviews of chips. I expect the 900 number came from snack reviews in toto. Also, as written, the description specified reviews of over 900 individual chips, not over 900 reviews. --Dumarest 15:24, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Is there a list of all potato chip flavours throught time?
Is there a list of all potato chip flavours throught time?Mooocow 13:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Language
The page is currently a mixture of American English and British English and should be copyedited to just one. Not sure how the page started; the title suggests American, but there are rather more instances of 'flavour' than 'flavor' on the page, so it may have started as British. - MPF 14:54, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I think it's quite noticable that this entry has been contributed by a mixture of British English and American English speakers and agree that it should be more consistent. In some cases the word crisp is Italicised and in other cases it is not, furthermore there is inconsistency in the spelling of words. American English seems the logical choice as the title of the article is the Americanised term. --JamesTheNumberless 13:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Removal of nutrition section
I have removed the nutrition section because the source provided says nothing about "hypertonic saturated fat stress", and that phrase doesn't appear in google. The article is newsworthy however and could probably be mentioned in the fat article. Also see this article. Graham 87 04:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I have just removed it again. I agree that it sounds helpful, but the source given (a British Medical Journal article) does not exist. AntiVan 04:18, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * And again. The anonymous user (and probably myself as well if the rule is interpreted literally) are probably coming close to violating the three revert rule. Graham 87 04:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

UK v US products
As a Brit now living in the US, I can see both sides of the arguments so, I have put up a new article Potato crisps which is specifically on the UK crisp and not any other potato or corn based products. The current potato chip article could be cleaned up to relate solely to the US version as others have suggested. Geotek 20:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I feel this was a good move, the potato chip is very much biased towards a US market, where as the potato crisp is more UK biased. Both articles are needed as there are variations in both countries and it is better noted from them being split. Merging them means that the article will lose its simplicity. --PrincessBrat 20:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

As the writer of the potato crisp (UK) article, I find that the merge - meaning just delete the UK crisp page is somewhat disappointing..... what happened to all the the history of the crisp in the UK and the variation that I put up... if this is supposed to be an encyclopedia then all aspects should be included... whether merged or not......... throwing something out because it does not suit some people, to me seems to go against the spirit of Wiki. Geotek 01:12, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Ketchup chips need their own page.

---

Ketchup Chips a Canadian Delicacy
We need to have Nick Finlayson put up the ketchup chip article! It was amazing!

Economy Section / Tayto innovation
The Economy section jumps into a discussion of a supposed innovation by Tayto without discussion what the actual innovation is and why it was so neat. There is a missing sentence or two:

The global potato chips market generated total revenues of 16.4 billion dollars in 2005. This accounted for 35.5% of the total savory snacks market in that year (46.1 billion dollar). The innovation became an overnight....


 * Thanks for bringing this up here. In fact there were two missing paragraphs. They were removed in this edit. The next edit occurred five seconds later as can be seen by setting the date format to ISO 8601 in special:preferences. The person who made the vandalism revert was using a manual program which takes a while to fetch data from Wikipedia; therefore the edit that removed the two paragraphs was not seen by the program and therefore not reverted. Graham 87 14:32, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

origins
"In the mid-1800s fried potatoes were on menus in the resorts around Saratoga Springs. One day in 1853 a customer at Carey B. Moon’s Lake House complained that the potatoes were soggy and tasteless. The cook, George Speck Crum, became angry and sent out extra-salty, thinly sliced potatoes so crisply fried they crunched. That’s one story.

"Mary Ann Fitzgerald, the Saratoga Springs historian, who last year starred in a German public television special on the potato chip, said another version of the story was floating around. This one involved the chef’s sister, Catherine Speck Adkins Wicks, who was frying doughnuts and slicing potatoes at the same time. A slice fell into the fat and the chip was born.

“What do I really think is the truth?” she said. “I think that there are more people involved than we realize. But this story comes down to us through oral history. There were no cameras recording it. So as much as I would like Kate to be the winner, it does sound like something George would have done. NYT 4jul07

It sounds fake, but seems to actually be true!-69.87.203.130 14:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Proto-chips
I just recently found a recipe for "Potatoes Biscuits" which are to be flavoured, make into "cakes" and done in the oven. Given that "doing potatoe cakes in the oven" may easily turn out as thin as ginger snaps, the recipe may as well be considered for "proto-potatoe chips". The recipe is to be found in the The Country Housewife and Lady's Director, Part II (1732) and attributed to Mrs Mary Gordon. --212.112.179.170 (talk) 10:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC) Also, found evidence of other "proto-chips" in The Cook's Oracle (1822) which gives a recipe for "frying" potatoe shavings in lard (fat). Sounds very chipsy to me. --212.112.179.170 (talk) 09:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Potato Crisps / Potato Chips
Why is this named 'Chips' ? I propose we rename this to Crisps, no reply in 24 hours and i will revert, cheers. Gazh 19:40, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It's basically the North American name vs the European name. Don't move or rename. Potato crisps already redirects here. Carson 22:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Except that most of Europe uses "chips". It's the UK and Ireland that are the exception here. --WorldWide Update 21:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Then why is the American name used? surely that is biased? Gazh 17:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Probably because someone created the potato chips article before potato crisps. There's no point renaming it to potato crisps because then others can use the same arguement and move it back to potato chips. Similarly, check out the entry for potato chips under Lamest_edit_wars. Carson 20:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The point in moving it back would be that at least half the time it would be 'Crisps', which is better than permananet 'Chips' is my view, so it may be worth changing this and then reverting the revert (if you follow) hmmm. Gazh 17:15, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't get it...you want to do a time-share thing so 'Potato crisps' would share contain the article for awhile...? Carson 05:51, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm basically saying that an edit war would be better than permamanent 'Chips', so i can see why people resort to those measures in unfair situations like this one, ofcourse i am not liklely to start one because to be honest i can't be arsed to go back and forth with a yank about Crisps. Gazh 09:34, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The origin section notes that the product originated in North America, so it's logical that the North American name be used. It's not biased at all.  Additionally, since the Crisps article redirects here, there's no actual point in moving the article back and forth.


 * Aye mebbes it does say that Crisps were invented in America, but i'd bet against it, I'm going to do a bit of googling, but i think the first Crisps may have been fried before the USA was colonised. Gazh 21:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Gazh, if you're thinking about starting a move war, one would hope that you would cite better sources than those you'd dredge up from tha interwebs using a search engine. JFD 20:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not going to start an 'edit war' JFD, but if i find something good i'll take the necessary actions. Gazh 21:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)


 * The potato is indigenous to the western hemisphere and, as a result, its introduction to the cuisines of Europe is contemporary with the European colonization of the Americas. Lack of documentary or physical proof aside, that leaves an awfully small window of time for the potato chip/crisp to be invented in Europe before the territory of the present-day United States was colonized.


 * The earliest documentation of frying as a method of preparing potatoes is from 18th century France (and it seems unlikely that, in the many centuries before European colonization, that it had never occurred to the indigenous peoples of the Americas to cook potatoes in fat).
 * Ah, but don't forget that the native people of the Americas didn't have steel knives to cut narrow slices. Also, fat sources were so rare in their diet, at least in Central America, that I've seen people speculate in print that the lack of fat was a motivating force for the use of cannibalism (which sounds like hooey to me, but provides a context that makes kettles of fried chips seem unlikely) 70.15.116.59 10:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * However, we are not talking about the first "fried potatoes," but the first "potato chips/crisps". JFD 21:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't forget that "chips" is also commonly used outside North America, including continental Europe. The term "crisps" seems to be limited to a few countries of the Commonwealth of Nations (not all of them) and Ireland. --WorldWide Update 21:35, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * In Sweden one says chips (declination: ett chips sg. indef., chipset sg. def., flera chips pl. indef., chipsen pl. def.), which supports that the British "crisps" is not the most relevant name for this product.
 * Jens Persson (90.231.244.42 (talk) 18:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC))
 * This is the English language version of Wikipedia, English being the language of England where they are known as "crisps", not "potato chips" or even "potato crisps", just "crisps" Stutley (talk) 14:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * In case you Brits didn't know, English also happens to be the language of the United States where they are known as "chips", not "crisps". You see - doesn't that sound like an equally idiotic and overall flimsy argument?


 * Anyway, just because this is the English language Wikipedia doesn't mean other languages shouldn't be taken into account, here. In quite a few languages, "(potato) chips" is the prevalent word used to describe the delicious snack food in question: Japanese: ポテトチップス (poteto chippusu); Dutch: aardappelchips; Russian: чипсы (chipsy); Polish: chipsy; Danish: chips; French: chips; Swedish: potatischips; German: Kartoffelchips...and I'm sure there are quite a few others as well.


 * Clearly the term "chips" is the least ambiguous of the non-English-speaking populace, and as such, should remain the dominant title for the article IMHO. Mikhajlovich (talk) 12:17, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * This is the English language wikipedia not the American, German or Japanese. Stutley (talk) 17:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I grew up within a mile of Moon's Lake House restaurant in Saratoga, New York where POTATO CHIPS WERE INVENTED. It most certainly is an American invention and the title should reflect that. Perhaps the section in this article on the invention of Saratoga Chips was not in the article at the time the nationalist from England started spouting his "edit war" jingo, I'll give him/her that benefit of the doubt. Whether the story is true, or whether chips/crisps were invented many times in many places in different way, Saratoga Chips are the ones that became famous and led to the chip phenomenon we have today that much is true. I dont know where all that Native American sideshow information and back-n-forth came from, its irrelevant, its like saying that the Aztec and Mayans invented the basketball we have today because they had a similar game, irrelevant! Basketball was invented in Springfield, Massachussetts (coincidentally perhaps less than 2 hours or so from Saratoga, NY!). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Camelbinky (talk • contribs) 00:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey everybody LOL
Am moving page to Potato Chip/Crisp so it has a more international name. LOL. --Serminigo 11:33, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Aftertaste?
Personally, I've found that I tend to avoid (or should avoid) potato chips because of a strong lingering aftertaste that reminds me more of corn than potato, which lingers not merely in the mouth but can be tasted/smelled from within the blood itself until it is eventually passed unchanged in fragrant urine. I even get the feeling that it increases the viscosity of both blood and urine but this could easily be my imagination getting the better of me. Can anyone hazard a guess as to what this substance might be? 70.15.116.59 10:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Does Anyone Remember....?
I'm hoping someone out there can recall a flavor of potato chip from the '70s. I distinctly remember my Dad bringing home a small bag of "Hot Dog" flavored chips. Instantly they became my all time favorite. Here in Canada, Old Dutch & Hostess are the 2 major manufacturers of chips. I have contacted both of them in recent past with hopes of at least finding out who made or distributed them. No luck. Either their records don't go back that far or no one there remembers. I did however find it odd that the company's history would not include a particular flavor which was a pretty good seller back then.

Reading several posts on the internet, I see that there is a "Coney Island Hot Dog With Mustard" flavor mentioned. That particular brand/flavor I have never seen nor heard of in Canada.

If anyone knows anything at all about the chips I mention, please post something to let me know. Thank you in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drtalk (talk • contribs) 23:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Flavor Overkill?
Am I the only one who thinks the section listing flavors in the UK is ridiculously overdone? If we're going to list every single variety that was ever produced in the country in the past 50 years (which is the impression it gives at the moment) then we should be doing the same for all the other countries in the list. A more sensible option would be to reduce it to just the more common of the localized varieties, as has already been done with the other countries in the list. Toroca (talk) 04:16, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Ready salted was missing! I have added it. Stutley (talk) 06:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comprehensiveness is a virtue. Guv2006 (talk) 09:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Confused
The article on crisps is titled "potato chip" and the article on chips is titled "french fries". These terms are colloquial not English language. Stutley (talk) 14:30, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * These terms are not colloquial, they are regional. Huge difference.Mikhajlovich (talk) 12:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * If you consider American English to be regional rather than colloquial, then it must be a seperate language and should have it's own wiki. Stutley (talk) 09:18, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * American English is indeed regional and not true english, e.g. "a rubber" is an eraser in true English and has no other meaning.


 * You weren't thinking "eraser" when you wrote that. Ha Ha —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.222.243.123 (talk) 22:00, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Whoa...this article is wearing thin
This needs to be reworded so that it sounds more concrete and it needs to be more organized instead of spitting random facts at my face. Can someone do that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.127.114 (talk) 01:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Weight gain during processing?
In the article it currently says "Since potatoes are 75% water it takes approximately one pound of potatoes to make four pounds of potato chips." This seems to say that because they have lots of water they gain weight while cooking. This doesn't seem to make sense, or am I misunderstanding it? If they lose weight, it needs to be fixed, if they gain weight then a more full explanation needs to be given. --D.c.camero (talk) 19:25, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

tater chip change yuk
I was wandering why frito-lay changed their bar b q chips? they suck now big time. I always bought the k c mastrer. We loved them now you cant find them. We have noticed that 2 more bar b qs have replaced them and we HATE them with a pation. So why did lays screw their loyl customers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.145.43 (talk) 16:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Examples of regional varieties
I lived in Germany for many years and was unaware of the supposedly popular 'Pepper' crisps: by far the most common German flavour is paprika! —Preceding unsigned comment added by DickyP (talk • contribs) 14:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Every conceivable flavour is available here in most supermarkets (short of prawn cocktail and worcestershire sauce), contrary to what the peculiarly uninformed list states. Most popular are hungarian paprika, cheese and onion and sour cream and so-called "Flipps", grub-shaped corn chips that are traditionally peanut-flavoured. (although there are many new variants here, to).188.118.173.154 (talk) 13:33, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Lime flavoured chips
It says lime-flavoured potato chips are labelled "Limón" - but that's Spanish for lemon, not lime, which is cal. Do they really call lime flavour lemon?! Is that just a gringo mistranslation?!Gymnophoria (talk) 21:23, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Earlier than Saratoga ?
The last revert got me looking into the ref that had been given, this led to the following available on Gutenburg at http://www.gutenberg.org/files/28681/28681-h/28681-h.htm#no_104- PAGE 157..... Potatoes fried in Slices or Shavings.—(No. 104.) Peel large potatoes; slice them about a quarter of an inch thick, or cut them in shavings round and round, as you would peel a lemon; dry them well in a clean cloth, and fry them in lard or dripping. Take care that your fat and frying-pan are quite clean; put it on a quick fire, watch it, and as soon as the lard boils, and is still, put in the slices of potato, and keep moving them till they are crisp. Take them up, and lay them to drain on a sieve: send them up with a very little salt sprinkled over them.

The cook’s oracle; and housekeeper’s manual. William Kitchiner, M.D., Adapted to the American public by a medical gentleman. From the last London edition. 1830

Geotek (talk) 23:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Indented line Well looking at the date of that and the fact that it was adapted from an earlier London edition it does seem to be a good argument against the crisps being first made in Saratoga.--109.149.168.88 (talk) 13:14, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

South Africa
In South Africa I am sure the correct word is "crisps" not "chips". Chips is used sometimes, but normally refers to "slap chips" (they are like English chips). Jonathan Peel (talk) 07:16, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Acrylamides
What about the acrylamide issue, which generated quite a lot of press and controversy (even a lawsuit) not so long ago? I think the potential presence of a carcinogen in potato chips (which appears to be due to the starch content and the high temperatures at which the potatoes are fried) and the fact that some manufactures had to pay large fines and were legally forced to take measures deserves at least some kind of mention in this article. 213.37.6.101 (talk) 17:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Health concerns - tooth decay
The reference in the text is to an NHS website that lists crisps as fermented carbohydrates, which they are not. I think there are more relevant references that could be incorprated into the text here. An episode of the BBC television programme 'QI' suggested that crisps and raisins in particular were 'the worst foods to eat for tooth decay' because they could get stuck in natural pits and fissures in teeth and stay in the mouth longer than sweets or sugary drinks. Bacteria in the mouth feed off sugar and carbohydrates present in all types of foods to produce organic acids, and its these that if not cleaned can eat away at enamel and may ultimately lead to dental caries.

There is some scientific research in this area which supports the suggestion that crisps can get stuck in the mouth. However, these studies are limited in the variety of foodstuffs that have been tested and compared and therefore it should not been inferred that crisps are the 'worst' food for development of tooth decay.

One major scientific papers in this area is 'Clearance and metabolism of starch foods in the oral cavity' - Harald Linke of the New York University Dental Center investigated six carbohydrate rich foods (popcorn, potato chips [crisps], corn flakes, bread sticks, hard pretzels and wheat crackers) and compared these with a single high sugar food type (a chocolate-covered candy bar).

In a related paper Mark Helpin of Temple University investigated sugar as a breakdown product in his paper 'Accumulation of fermentable sugars and metabolic acids in food particles that become entrapped on the dentition'. His research was also limited a small number of foods including doughnuts, potato chips [crisps], salted crackers, peanut butter cookies and chocolate-caramel-peanut bars.

Links to the papers are here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10545668 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9003236.

89.206.184.100 (talk) 13:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Addition to origins
This information needs to be added:

The Choctaw moity Ahi Apet Okla (later also called Okla Tannip or Upper Towns) drew its name from the fact that instead of preserving potatoes in rock cairns for the winter, as did the two other districts, they sliced the potatoes into thin slivers and dried them with hickory smoke (the world's first potato chips) and then stored them in baskets. http://www.aihd.ku.edu/foods/choctaw.html http://www.mychoctawfamily.com/choctawtreaties.htm

And no doubt the residents of this district were proud of their special name because it recognized them for a special practice apparently not utilized by residents of other Okla districts or the neighboring Chickasaws or Cherokees. Instead of storing their potato crop in the rock cairns previously described, the Ahi Apet Oklans had developed a special way for preserving their potatoes. When harvested, the potatoes were washed and then sliced into thin slices. These potato slices were lightly smoked with hickory smoke and then allowed to dehydrate in the sun. Once the potato slices were dry, they could be placed into bags of animal skins and hanged inside the home until time for use. A few of the slices tossed into the cooking pot soon took on moisture and could be cooked with meats just as one would other potatoes. Or the slices of potato could be taken dry and chewed with a bit of dried meat to give the meat flavor and the Oklan strength. You might say that the Ahi Apet Oklans invented the potato chip hundreds of years before the Buffalo, N.Y., baker unveiled the first modern potato chip at the 1896 world’s fair. The potato chip is not the only popular food that the white man and America has borrowed from Okla… or the Choctaw. http://mike-boucher.com/wordpress/?page_id=131 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.95.86.197 (talk) 23:21, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Blatant Advertising by Lay's (or a puppet thereof)
I have never heard of Lay's Potato Chips. Odd, then, that this article refers to them at least 15 times throughout. I'll check back at a later date to see if some of these have been ripped out. If not, I'll have a crack at it. Blitterbug 10:30, 28 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blitterbug (talk • contribs)

Lay's is the #1 maker of snack foods in America (59% market share according to their Wikipedia page), so I am guessing you do not live in the USA. Nevertheless, removing company-specific information is probably a good call. 173.188.73.219 (talk) 21:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Blitterbug, your userpage suggests that you may be British. If that's the case you've surely heard of Walkers. As the article notes, Walkers is a regional brand of Lay's. The logos are actually identical except for the words themselves. Personally, I don't think the Lay's mentions are excessive because nearly all of them are in the regional varieties section. Lay's happens to be dominant in so many markets around the world so their flavours are notable in that context. --JGGardiner (talk) 08:51, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

This article reads like an advertisement. Apparently, almost every manufacturer of "chips" or "crisps" has managed to infiltrate the text and add marketing blurbs that are completely irrelevant to the topic. These companies are slowly and methodically lowering the standards of this site, and eroding the value of the articles. The "facts" behind their statements could be stated without referencing brands at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.39.86 (talk) 03:42, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

The reason you may not of heard of it is because they many be breaded as Walkers in your jurisdiction — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.106.142.1 (talk) 16:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Potato chip. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100127093724/http://students.cup.edu:80/mof8893/food/history.html to http://students.cup.edu/mof8893/food/history.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 11:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

History
The history section characterizes a recipe for fried potato slices in William Kitchiner's 1822 cookbook The Cook's Oracle (and two other early cookbooks with recipes derived from his cookbook) as the earliest know reference to potato "chips" (American) or crisps (British). However, if you actually read the recipes in those references, you see that they cut the potato slices to a thickness of "about a quarter of an inch thick," or "in shavings round and round, as you would peel a lemon". Considering the lemon peels are also about a quarter of an inch thick - both of these descriptions do NOT constitute "potato chips," as that term is contemplated by this article. At most, they are fried potatoes; not "chips" or "crisps." The author Brian D'Ambrosio who is cited in the next paragraph as having said, "The Cook's Oracle includes a recipe for what can only be described as a potato chip," rings hollow. I do not think that you can describe the fried potatoes in the Cook's Oracle as a potato chip, at all. A chip must be cut much thinner. Perhaps the "chip" (or "crisp") was first introduced at Saratoga Springs, after all. Svaihingen (talk) 21:36, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Potato chip. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080824072601/http://www.calbee.com.hk:80/html/tch/home/index.jsp to http://www.calbee.com.hk/html/tch/home/index.jsp
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101029000209/http://www.walkers.co.uk:80/flavourcup/faqs.html to http://www.walkers.co.uk/flavourcup/faqs.html#/help/faqs

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 22:12, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Debate on invention/inventor
There seems to be an argument, by this http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/10965628/Crisps-buoyed-Britain-in-its-darkest-hour.html british tabloid article that Britain invented the potato chip, as opposed to George Crum. In my reading of the article, it's poorly sourced, and obviously biased. The article begins by "Americans claim to have invented crisps, but the Brits know better". It's a typical Anti-American Little Englander piece in the British Tabloid press, and is not necessarily a valid reliable source. Unlike American Newspapers, British Newspapers are fairly well known for being "loose" with the facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:DCEB:8539:38B6:F0CD (talk) 22:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


 * As an aside, what the telegraph article claims is the beginning of the potato chip, is : Dr William Kitchiner's early 19th century compendium The Cook's Oracle, enjoined readers to “peel large potatoes... cut them in shavings round and round, as you would peel a lemon; dry them well in a clean cloth, and fry them in lard or dripping.” ". This is obviously NOT how a potato chip is made, it is more akin to a shoestring, or possibly curly fry (though, still not either of those).  It's most certainly not a potato chip, an American Invention.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:DCEB:8539:38B6:F0CD (talk) 22:36, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

request for edit
Please remove "crisps" from the picture caption. According to ENGVAR there is no feasible or rationale reason it should be in there.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. clpo13(talk) 17:34, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Trivial issue
This is trivial, but some pushers of British English keep pushing that the caption on the picture should be 'potato chips/crisps'. This format doesn't fit with other british english/American English versions of articles. As this is an American English article (and of course, an American English invention) then the caption should be in but one version of english. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:147:9D67:75B5:F923 (talk) 20:31, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Why are you removing the name they're known by in half the English-speaking world?
 * There is no reason here why "American inventions are written in American", especially not when, as in this case, they're an English invention and not American.
 * Your edits here are as POV-biased, and as edit-war repetitious, as they are at Mars (chocolate bar). Andy Dingley (talk) 20:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Andy, almost every source, except for the spurious one here, shows that they were invented in Saratoga Springs NY, a blessed locale. Irregardless, this article is written in American English, not british english, thus, should have the picture captions in the correct format (American, that is).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:147:9D67:75B5:F923 (talk) 21:11, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The article was changed against engvar on December 24th, 2014, 13 years after inception, in an obvious attempt to change the article to british english as opposed to the proper American English for the article. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Potato_chip&direction=prev&oldid=639453913   This isn't even an issue of removing information.  The issue is an engvar issue, and for gods sake, the article is in American English, not british!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:147:9D67:75B5:F923 (talk) 21:54, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, looking at French fries this is not how the caption is set up. Again, the caption and the history were changed by someone after 13 years stable.  Is there any reason, other than nationalistic pride on the behest of the UK, that we are keeping it this way? It's out-of-line.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:DCEB:8539:38B6:F0CD (talk) 23:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Engvar does not mean you exclude other names by which something is known to significant numbers of people. It simply means the main title and text use the particular Engvar and the lead/captions use that 'Engvar' term first. There are countless articles where both US & UK and other 'local' terms are used in the lead and text. Engvar also has little to do with who invented the item. A Briton first split the atom, and invented antibiotics, would that be a good reason for making all atomic physics and antibiotics articles in UK English? I don't think so. Unless a subject has a strong inherent relationship to one kind of Eng, (Pearl Harbor, Kennedy Center, Shakespeare, Whitman etc), MOS:RETAIN mainly dictates that whatever variety of Eng the article was created with be kept. Pincrete (talk) 11:01, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey Pincrete, you hit the nail right on the head. The article was in American English, and the caption was changed to British English without consensus.  I moved it back, and user:Andy Digly went edit warring to keep it in british, though, as you so succinctly stated, it should obviously be in American. Thanks!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:9DCD:529B:FC4B:E9F8 (talk) 19:09, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You seem to be having some truthfulness issues again. This article was never "changed to British English". Andy Dingley (talk) 19:33, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * "Crisps" is British English andy. There's no reason to include british in an American English article repeatedly.  Much like french fries, harbor, etc.  Don't need to keep putting your preferred britishisms in a properly American article, it doens't need to be internationalized.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:9DCD:529B:FC4B:E9F8 (talk) 20:42, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * IP E9F8, you completely misunderstood my post above, Engvar does not mean you exclude other names by which something is known to significant numbers of people. No, there would be no reason to use the term used by speakers of UK English, IF this were US Wikipedia! It isn't though, so we do each other the courtesy of using additional terms the other is likely to understand, which is exactly what Andy did. Were WP to follow your logic, everything invented or discovered before US existed (Beer? bread? 9/10s of all foods? half the natural world? half of human knowledge?) would be SOLELY in UK English. Pincrete (talk) 21:07, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Pincrete, I think you may misunderstand engvar. There is a brief introduction of the other name in the lede, and then, as per wikipedia WP:ENGVAR "While Wikipedia does not favor any national variety of English, within a given article the conventions of one particular variety should be followed consistently."  So once a convention for the article has been taken, it should stay that way.  This article, by convention, is in American English, not british english.  Further, for about 13 years, there was no double caption on the image.  It should obviously stay that way.  Nobody has yet given a reason against that.  Someone was BOLD to change it, I REVERTED it, and Andy keeps changing it back without DISCUSSION.  So, I shall, once again, revert.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:B8B9:56CD:4FF4:D264 (talk) 19:09, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

George Crum myth
Since its a well documented myth is there too much detail on Crum in the history section? I'm not advocating erasing him because the story is pretty well known to those to us who have long held an interest in the subject, but it seems slightly excessive for the history section especially when it's pseudohistory. As a baseball fan i'm reminded of the Doubleday myth when I think of Crum, and Doubleday is not afforded such detail. Thoughts?. WisconsinPat (talk) 16:06, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
 * There is an RfC above about who invented chips/crisps. Whilst it may be known who first produced them commercially, who first fried thin slices of potato is probably not answerable and should not be presented as facts IMO. Pincrete (talk) 09:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

RfC: Should the history of potato chips use a WP:RS tabloid broadsheet newspaper article as reliable source

 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should potato chips have it's history changed by a telegraph article, which refers to tornado fries and not potato chips anyways? 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:DCEB:8539:38B6:F0CD (talk) 23:26, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The Telegraph is hardly a "tabloid". Andy Dingley (talk) 23:55, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Andy, first off, whether or not they contribute to the yellow journalism so often seen in the british newspapers is, I guess, up to the eye of the beholder. More importantly, where on earth do you get off changing the title of a RFC to suit your interests? You shouldn't delete the text and title of an RFC and hope that nobody notices.  The Telegraph is considered by many to be a mouthpiece of a single political party, staunchly to the right of the political spectrum.  From the wiki article on them "In February 2015 the chief political commentator of the Daily Telegraph, Peter Oborne resigned. Oborne accused the paper of a "form of fraud on its readers"[26] for its coverage of the bank HSBC in relation to a Swiss tax-dodging scandal that was widely covered by other news media. He alleged that editorial decisions about news content had been heavily influenced by the advertising arm of the newspaper because of commercial interests.[27] Professor Jay Rosen at New York University stated that Oborne's resignation statement was "one of the most important things a journalist has written about journalism lately".[27]"  That sounds a whole lot like tabloid to me.  Yet, let's get back to the point.

YOU DELETED/CHANGED AN RFC TITLE???!??!?! What makes you think you're better than the rest of us that play by the rules??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:DCEB:8539:38B6:F0CD (talk) 00:08, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Comments. Firstly, the Daily Telegraph is not a tabloid newspaper, either in layout or in content, and describing it as such in the section header is misleading. Secondly, the article in question appears to be this, which is by the authors of A Brief History of Crisps. I can't find out anything about these authors, or about the book in question, in any of the usual reliable sources. If Kitchiner's recipe really is believed to be the earliest known recipe for crisps/chips, then surely there is a better source for it than this. The assertion elsewhere on the talk page, that "is obviously NOT how a potato chip is made" is no good as a way of deciding whether or not the claim should be in the article; wikipedia reports what reliable sources say, not what some editor thinks is obvious. Thirdly, the assertion that the article refers to "tornado fries and not potato chips" is simply false. It is talking throughout about crisps, which are what us Brits call what Americans call potato chips. I have never even heard of a "tornado fry" until now, and googling it I don't think we have anything which looks like that in the UK. (As an aside, I'd remove everything after the comment of the RfC statement in the interests of following the RfC's instructions to keep the statement "neutral and brief": that's certainly not a neutrally worded statement). Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:31, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Comment I endorse everything that Caeciliusinhorto says about the failure of this RfC to even attempt neutrality or accuracy and what he says specifically about the Telegraph. The political position of a paper has nothing to do with its reputation for fact-checking, and if we are going to go in for political labelling, the party it supports is to the left of the US Democrats on most issues!. Also it is not clear what question you are asking, certainly what question that could not be answered by WP:RSN, which would probably tell you that this paper generally has a reasonable reputation for fact-checking, but this particular claim is not particularly factual! Who first fried thin slices of potato? Who first called them 'chips/crisps'? How thin do they have to be to qualify? Probably the modern product is inherently manufactured and therefore post-industrialisation of food. for the record, I've never bought the Telegraph Pincrete (talk) 23:08, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Tornado chips! A long thin spiral fried potato-on-a-stick, for those dying to know. Pincrete (talk) 14:01, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Agree this is a faulty RfC. Nominator: Stow the histrionics. It's standard operating procedure per WP:REFACTOR and WP:RFC to tweak a reparable non-neutral pseudo-RfC into a viable, legitimate one, and screeching against it just proves that the neutrality concerns were spot-on. Whether the newspaper has a bias (hint: all of them do, and your apparently personal dislike of conservatives is at least as much of a bias as any provided by the paper in question) has no bearing on the question of whether they're less or more reliable than another newspaper on a subject like the history of potato chips/crips. The only salient alleged fact in the would-be RfC is that the source in question may really be about "tornado fries", whatever those are, and thus be off-topic, faulty sourcing due to a wording ambiguity in the newspaper piece. Try again, stick to the relevant facts, and leave out the hyperbolic finger-pointing. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  09:28, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment I found this story on HighBeam from The Irish Times, relevant quote: - There's a popular story around the invention of crisps. Though recipes for thin slices of fried potatoes appeared as early as 1822 in William Kitchiner's cookbook The Cook's Oracle, most people attribute the invention of this most wondrous of savoury snacks to a disgruntled chef called George Crum, working in Saratoga Springs in New York.- William Kitchiner's cookbook is also in the public domain and can be viewed at the Internet Archive - The Cook's Oracle, with the recipe on page 208. Then there is also the story of Crum's sister, Katie Speck Wicks, who actually made the discovery, her obituary credited her with the chip's creation.How the Hot Dog Found Its Bun, Crunch!: A History of the Great American Potato Chip, p20, From Football to Fig Newtons, p61, Snopes.-- Isaidnoway (talk)  15:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm going off topic somewhat here, but still none of these are works by food historians, none appear to be academic works, and only one of them (Crunch!) is published by an academic press. If works by journalists is the best which can be done for sources, then that's what this article will have to have (in which case the Telegraph article is probably okay).  It's a shame that there's nothing better, but that's just how it is... Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 17:00, 9 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes - as per the refactored (and vague) RfC. We can use newspapers as reliable sources. Perhaps a more specific question could be put? At the moment all we have is general discussion and a lot of confusion for anybody coming her via the feedback service. I suggest the RfC originator withdraw the RfC, formulate a more specific question as per the excellent advice given at WP:RFC, and start over. --Pete (talk) 04:56, 10 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RFC: Should the caption include "crisps" as well as "chips"?
Should the caption (not the article title) be "Potato chips" or "Potato chips / crisps"? See

There has been considerable edit-warring here lately by an IP removing the UK term. It has been restored by multiple editors. I see this as a purely behavioural and POV issue, but before going to ANEW would like to confirm consensus from others.

IMHO, both terms are needed and should be used. This is our usual behaviour.

The IP has made similar edits at Mars (chocolate bar). They have raised an RfC here to try and discredit a source showing the prior British invention, but that gained no support. They have claimed, incorrectly, that ENGVAR requires the UK alternative name to be removed (obviously it doesn't). They have used a variety of IPs (a large British ISP), but this is just technical and should not be construed as deliberate socking. They have even raised a protected edit request, when the article was protected against their own edit warring.

Thoughts? Andy Dingley (talk) 12:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Include UK variant name in both lead and caption with 'or' instead of slash, these are short words and it hardly seems worth arguing about when include is more informative. There is no justification for excluding UK English readers from understanding the article. Pincrete (talk) 14:56, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't really care whether or not the caption should include both "crisps" and "chips", but suggesting that UK English readers will be excluded from understanding the article otherwise is hyperbolic. As a British reader of this article, I am perfectly capable of understanding that in American English "chips" is used rather than "crisps". Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 10:23, 16 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Include - we talk things over rather than sneak around being encycloguerillas. In Australia, these things are chips rather than crisps, but there are enough British folk wolfing down these things that we can't fairly ignore them. --Pete (talk) 19:31, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Include, of course. The article may use the written form of the dialect of English spoken in the colonies, but crisps are a British invention... Thomas.W talk 21:00, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Do not include It's in the lede. It doesn't need to be anywhere else.  It's not excluding UK english readers from understanding if it's in the lede. We don't include both names throughout in other articles.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:980E:77E2:206:39F3 (talk) 08:53, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Omit per MOS:ARTCON, which only supports "passages explicitly discussing varieties of English". I can't see that the caption or infobox title falls under that (compared to something like Biscuit, where the lede image does actually address the different meanings). infobox food has an "alternate_name" field, which seems like a better place to mention this, and can comfortably give a "(British English)" explanation. --McGeddon (talk) 11:19, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Using the 'alt names' box seems an admirably sensible suggestion. Using US English as the 'main' term seems apt, since it is the more widespread term worldwide. Pincrete (talk) 12:21, 16 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Include - Such a highly contested topic for such a innocuous topic/term. That being said, I see no reasonable argument for excluding "crisps". Meatsgains (talk) 01:07, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Omit - I feel like the caption should match the article title, and obviously the article title must remain "chip" per the MOS regarding most common worldwide usage. Use the "alternate_name" field to include "crisp". Fieari (talk) 06:15, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Include - one wouldn't want an inconsistent text, but it doesn't hurt to reiterate that there are alternative terms.William Avery (talk) 23:27, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Are there any other examples where this is done? Tire? French Fries? Color? They may use them in the alternative names, but the actual image header isn't "French Fries/Chips" or "Colored Pencils/Coloured Pencils" if nothing else, it's more confusing. Use the image to demonstrate what the article is actually talking about.  It's like labeling a variable, we now know that this image = this term.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:71D7:E952:CC82:5ADA (talk) 07:20, 19 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Omit and certainly no slash. The caption should match the article title unless changing it helps communicate some important information. Adding "crisps" to the caption doesn't communicate additional valuable information, especially since the information is already in lede.  It makes British English speakers feel included.  Wikipedia is about the information and about information being inclusive like an encyclopedia, not about making people feel included.  The information is in the lede. That's good enough.  And certainly don't use a slash if "crisps" is included.  That's just lazy.  Use an "or" or add a second line underneath, maybe in italics and smaller type, or do something, anything, but a slash.  A slash is vague, inaccurate and just adds clutter.  Rarely is a slash needed.  It is usually a result poor writing or an unwillingness to be WP:Bold and make a decision.--Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 05:02, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Omit. The article title, the infobox title, and the image caption should all use one synonym.  The alternate synonym is already appropriately and prominently included among the first words in the article text.  Edgeweyes (talk) 11:35, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Omit As stated by others, the displaying of alternate regional names in the lead and infobox is sufficient. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 15:50, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not a huge deal or anything by my gut instinct is to omit. "Crisps" is mentioned in the lede, so it's not like the article wouldn't make any sense to UK readers, and having alternate names in the lede but not in the infobox title/caption seems like the standard format for this kind of thing-- see french fries, draughts, cotton candy, ice pop, rutabaga, association football, full stop, sprinkles, etc. Some of these infoboxes have alternate names or synonyms as a separate field, but none list them in the caption or header. In my search through articles with separate UK and American names that had infoboxes, I only found one exception-- eggplant. There might be others lurking around, but it's not the norm. Lost tiree, lost dutch :O (talk) 19:10, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Don't include. It's a matter of style more than anything else, but using one synonym in the infobox title is best - just like we wouldn't include two synonyms in an article title.  Additionally, I share Iloilo Wanderer's disdain for the ugly slash that started this RFC (if two synonyms must be used, find a better way).  Deli nk (talk) 15:28, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Split the difference. I notice that the terminology appears twice in the infobox: as a bold-font title at the top, and as a caption just under the image. Given the redundancy, why not split the difference? (And no, there is no iron law of thermodynamics that requires the infobox title and caption to be identical.) Have "Potato chips" as the title at the top, and have "Potato chips, or crisps" as the image caption. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:56, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

My correct edit was removed
I added a small part to the cited recipe, the first ever printed recipe for chips/crisps. It mentions frying the potatoes 'till they are crisp'. Given it's a UK recipe and they are known as crisps in the UK, this seems a sensible addition (in fact, I was surprised it hadn't been included). It is clear in the cited source. CkueBot has removed it. Can someone reinstate it please? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.116.209 (talk) 15:02, 18 August 2016 (UTC)