Talk:Snack

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 9 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ali-AlhajiA7A. Peer reviewers: Mhickss, ChaserBerry, Albertogramirez, Norm1237.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:37, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Change the picture for the Prezels
Propose: The picture of the prezels shows salty sticks, I think this is misleading and therefore we should change it either to a prezels picture or make a salty sticks wiki article. Rjr89 (talk) 12:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Already a page on this...
Ummm...? We already have snack food. This page is redundant and should be deleted. --174.111.105.154 (talk) 00:24, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose – Snack food is often characterized as being junk food, whereas a snack is associated with the type of eating known as snacking. Northamerica1000(talk) 13:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose - It's not the same thing. This article refers to the meal, while snack food refers to the food which makes up the meal. 108.20.47.212 (talk) 21:47, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Unsourced statements removed.
I have removed the following unsourced claims from the article:


 * Snack foods are often subjectively classified as junk food because they typically have little or no nutritional value, and are not seen as contributing towards general health and nutrition. With growing concerns for diet, weight control and general health,


 * Excessive snacking has been implicated in the increasing prevalence of obesity in many countries.


 * A beverage may be considered a snack if it possesses a substantive food item (e.g. bananas, kiwis, or strawberries) that has been blended to create a smoothie.


 * Plain snacks like plain cereals, pasta, and vegetables are also mildly popular, and the word snack has often been used to refer to a larger meal involving cooked or leftover items. Six-meal eating is a form of eating that incorporates healthy snacks in between small meals, to stave off hunger and promote weight loss.

Please feel free to restore them if they can be properly sourced. bd2412 T 05:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 8 June 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved. I originally relisted this, but, upon reconsideration, I feel this is the correct close. (closed by a page mover)  Omni Flames ( talk ) 11:15, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Snack → Snack food – In February, the article Snack food was unilaterally merged into Snack, in spite of two failed proposals, the first one concluded in 2011, the second one concluded in 2016 (see above), both tending opposed. Snacking has a long history that goes far beyond processed convenience food, and in the Global South as well as in many households of the world, it still isn't equated with junk food, but related to a small meal taken between breakfast and lunch, or between lunch and diner. Therefore, the clearly better match would have been a page merge with snacking. While it's almost impossible to disentangle the two articles after subsequent edits have been done, restoring the original name is all we can do. I'd subsequently propose snack to either redirect to snacking, or snacking to be moved here and expanded/improved with some of this page's original content. Other proposals how to restore a reasonable situation are welcome, too. I'm therefore pinging the participants of prior discussions and the editor who merged the articles: Too bad that it's so complicated now, but all we can learn from it, is to be more cautious before merging articles, especially if there clearly is no consensus. Everybody note that page merges can't be easily undone, especially when merging from a more specific to a more general topic. -- PanchoS (talk) 12:17, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The problem here is that the phrase, "snack food", has no distinct meaning. Any food eaten as a snack is by definition a snack food. The food itself is a subtopic of the concept of snacking, not a separate topic. This is not changed merely due to the fact that certain foods are particularly marketed as "snack foods", and that some of those foods have health implications. bd2412  T 13:34, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Since we have List of snack foods, it'd be a bit odd not to have an article on the topic of snack foods. Powers T 17:43, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Just move List of snack foods → List of snacks. As in List of Japanese snacks. Voila. wbm1058 (talk) 03:27, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. Regardless of the merits one way or another, this merge was done completely out of process. But for the record, I continue to believe these are two separate topics. Much research has been done into snack foods; there should be plenty of secondary sources out there on the topic. Powers T 17:43, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The merge was not out of process. It was posted at Proposed mergers for broader input, and there was support without objection there. bd2412  T 17:46, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Can you link to that discussion? User:PanchoS said it was unilateral.  Powers T 17:55, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, from what I can see there were two merge discussions: the one above, and this one here: Talk:Snack food. Both were concluded without consensus to merge, with an opposing tendency. The Proposed mergers discussion now brings up, has never been announced here, assumes an existing consensus, and only yielded a single comment about the feasibility of a merger, not about whether it should be merged or not. Please note that I don't think BD2412's efforts were bad-faithed, in the contrary. But they disregarded outspoken opposition to the article merge and a lacking consensus. --PanchoS (talk) 19:59, 8 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Oppose. The current title is more concise. A snack is food, so adding "food" to "snack" does nothing to naturally disambiguate the term "snack". The article defines a snack as "a portion of food", not "portions of foods" which might form a "light meal". The idea that "snack" shouldn't have been combined into "snack food" is silly. The source was tagged as a stub, so it was easily absorbed into the target. Where the debate should lie is on whether snack and snacking are separate topics. If they remain separate, I have no objection to moving content from one to the other as appropriate. So feel free to move any content that originated in the former snack food article to snacking as appropriate. Sleeping redirects to sleep. Conversing redirects to conversation. So it's reasonable that snacking could redirect to snack. But since eating and food are separate topics, there's a rationale for keeping snacks and snacking separate. wbm1058 (talk) 04:56, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Current article is a good topic with a good concise title. However the merge with the snack food article has produced a messy and unfocussed article, for example the History section relates to Snack food but not to snacking generally. Suggest the merge be reversed, or alternatively, refactor the article to have a section on Snack food with the current history section a subsection of it, and redirect Snack food to the high-level section. Perhaps that would be better; There's not enough material here for two articles, and most of what is here on snack foods duplicates List of snack foods where the information is better formatted and more complete. Andrewa (talk) 06:26, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This page doesn't need a move, if anything needs a move it's List of snack foods to [[:List of snacks.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   08:05, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose: current name is WP:CONSISTENT, with related terms such as Breakfast, Lunch, and Dinner. In addition the current name is more WP:CONCISE and WP:PRECISE than the proposed move. Ebonelm (talk) 09:56, 16 June 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

I'm not too pleased that this discussion was closed so quickly after a raft of new comments (coming a week after the previous last comment), giving no chance for a reply or rebuttal. Powers T 18:34, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Opening sentence in lede
The very first sentence reads, "A snack is a small service of food and generally eaten between meals". Generally? Surely everyone is between meals when they aren't in the process of having a meal, and anything eaten is part of the meal and is not a snack. The point being that snacks are ALWAYS eaten between meals. Thoughts? FillsHerTease (talk) 06:04, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:38, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Taichung Sun Cake.JPG

Description when hovering over hyperlink
When I hover over a hyperlink to the snack article (like in the first paragraph of the cashew article), the description is of the corophagia article. Not sure where exactly to fix that but it definitely should be fixed. Nothda (talk) 05:17, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Stella Doro sesame bread sticks
Why aren’t you making them anymore. Enjoy them. Thank you Mrs. Presti 71.104.18.254 (talk) 16:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

English variant used?
After this change, I'd like to ask what English variant is currently in use in this article, and if we can start enforcing that variant on this article? Jalen Folf  (Bark[s])  20:24, 15 June 2024 (UTC)