Talk:Sausage Making

Possible copyvio?
The article says that the recipes were derived from a cookbook. How 'derived' are they? Is it possible that they violate copyright?

Also, this article was already submitted under Sausage making and then listed as a VfD when it was submitted here with both words capitalised, rather than being moved over. Hopefully when someone moves to Wikibooks, they'll unpick the problems of there being two articles. I think both should probably be redirected to sausages. KeithD (talk) 12:23, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * KethD: I was the fellow who submitted the wrong articals to be deleted.  It was simply that I didn't realise they could be moved and I had already linked the same and updated artical in under the proper name.

terr 15:08, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. KeithD (talk) 15:23, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Not copyvio
This is not a copyvio. Keith does not have the book and I do. He should check the book before he starts making accusations.

The artical on sausages is fine just as it is. The problem with that artical is that it is not and should not be an artical on sausage making. These are two entirely different subjects just as reading and writing are different subjects. That should be obvious. Lets not muddle everything together.

The reason for the resubmission and not moving is simply because I did not know at the time that I could move it.

Personally, since I wrote the artical, I do not think this belongs in wikibooks. However it may be nice to have a book on sausage making. The subject of how sausages are made IMHO should be in the wikipedia as a subject standing on its own. One reason for this is that when I came here I was looking for some specific technical information on the formulations of Prague powders and specifically what Morton's quick cures are. I do not believe this is something that really belongs in an artical about what a sausage is.

There is a lot of misinformation and a certain amount of disinformation on this subject. Many old recipes suggest using saltpetre for instance and this frankly is a bad thing to do. Next we have the issue that Morton's quick cure for instance is NOT a formulation of Prague Powder #1. A lot of people do not know this, and given the arm waving by the marketing departments of people who want to sell salt at high prices, I can understand. The issue is that this actually jeaopardizes people's lives.

There are other sections that should be added to this artical - eg - types of casings, stuffing machines and so forth. This is a whole specialized field and what we get to eat is the result.

terr 15:08, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the clarification about the possible copyvio. I made no accusation at all, simply a request for more information as I had no way of checking the book for myself. I hope I caused no offence.


 * The article is much better now than when I suggested it be moved to Wikibooks - it was just a couple of recipes at that time. I'm still leaning towards thinking that it's better suited to a sub-heading within the sausage article, but rather than merging the articles myself, I'm going to hang back for a bit, and see how this article develops. KeithD (talk) 15:23, 19 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. I still think the artical on sausages will be stuffed a little too full if we try to put it all in the same casing.  But I agree with you that we can sit back and wait to see what happens. There are many articals in the wikipedia that are way too damn long.  terr 17:21, 19 August 2005 (UTC)