Talk:Cheese

Advertising content in article?

The list of cheeses in this article is a very idiosyncratic collection. As well as many traditional types, some are new varieties supplied by a single maker. I wonder if they have been slipped in as advertising?

If this goes on, soon there could be thousands of cheeses in the article. I'd suggest culling the list only to include the major traditional types of cheese, not recent inventions proprietary to a single source.

Marchino61 (talk) 03:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree. I've removed all that didn't have an article and any that were branded. Valereee (talk) 15:02, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Still true even with the much improved list; clearly it concerns Types of cheese but is essentially undue and indiscriminate for the current article. Accordingly I've moved it to its new home and given it a caption there. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:01, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Semi-Protected Edit Request on 4 May 2025

I have a citation for the general relative ratios of rennet to acid used in hard versus soft cheeses, replacing: `In general, softer, smaller, fresher cheeses are curdled with a greater proportion of acid to rennet than harder, larger, longer-aged varieties.[citation needed]` with: `In general, softer, smaller, fresher cheeses are curdled with a greater proportion of acid to rennet than harder, larger, longer-aged varieties.`

Not done for now: Generally, editors are going to want to be able to verify information for themselves before adding it to an article. Is there any source available online, or maybe an e-book that doesn't cost $250 like yours does? DrOrinScrivello (talk) 16:31, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

References

Spoken Article Request

There is a spoken article file for the article Cheese, but it is 19 years old, and as such, is extremely out of date. While it is not necessarily one of the more popular articles, it seems to me that it has enough notability to earn another audio file after almost two decades. Morpheus (talk) 21:18, 8 August 2025 (UTC)

Etymology and WP:NOTDICTIONARY

Isn't the etymology section of this article a violation of WP:NOTDICTIONARY? It primarily addresses linguistic aspects of the term rather than encyclopediic information about the topic (the dairy product). In the policy, etymology is explicitly listed as a core element of dictionary content, not encyclopedic articles.[1] Aim551551551 (talk) 11:38, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for discussing. Etymology is an aspect of many Wikipedia articles. It is relevant in so far as it throws light on the topic in question. You are correct that the name of the topic is not the primary focus; but the etymology illuminates how people have thought about the topic, and as such it is relevant. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:32, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Correct, for example the Wikipedia articles for Tea or Astronomy all have an etymology section. However, isn't quoting a dictionary a bit stretching the line, though?

The article reads: "The Online Etymological Dictionary states that "cheese" derives from: [verbatim quote]" Aim551551551 (talk) 14:22, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

That's only naming the source, which I'd agree isn't really necessary here; that could be confined to the citation. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:23, 26 January 2026 (UTC)