Talk:Cappuccino

The Sapsby user has been writing for several weeks that the cappuccino was born in Austria. Almost all sources claim that the cappuccino originated in Italy; according to this source,^[1] "Although the name 'Kapuziner' was used in Vienna, the actual cappuccino was invented in Italy, and the name was adapted to become 'Cappuccino.' It was first made in the early 1900a, shortly after the popularization of the espresso machine in 1901. The first record of the cappuccino we have found was in the 1930s.", cappuccino originated in Italy. I don't know what to do anymore; I wrote to him to first reach a consensus on the discussion page, but he continues undaunted. I'm not the only one who advised him to discuss first on the discussion page (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cappuccino&diff=prev&oldid=1223987338). I would also like to talk about Eduadoros; on the bagna càuda page there are many open discussions about the origin, but this user decided to add his information without first reaching a consensus on the discussion page. JacktheBrown (talk) 12:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Cappuccino comes from German Kapuziner. Remember that one part of Italy was under Austrian power in this time, it is clearly explained that the beverage called Kapuziner was introduced to Italy by Austrians and then the name was "italianized".

Kapuziner is exactly a cappuccino, you can read it here ^[2]

Which point don't you agree with? Sapsby (talk) 13:13, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Actually Italian cappucino is different from Kapuziner 62.211.180.100 (talk) 17:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes it is separate de:Kapuziner (Kaffee). Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 00:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

I have put a reference in this discussion showing that it is exactly the same. Differences could appear with time because of modernization of the techniques used but it is originally from Austria. You seem to forget that Italy did not exist as a nation in the 18th century, the north of Italy was also part of the Austrian empire. Sapsby (talk) 09:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

@Sapsby: stop adding "Austria" in the infobox, stop! You also removed "Italy" from the infobox of the espresso page; what will be your next move? JacktheBrown (talk) 15:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Finally, you have decided to respond. I have already explained here why I included Austria. In my opinion, Italy should be removed as the origin is only Austria. However, I have included both countries to maintain a more neutral position Sapsby (talk) 15:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@Sapsby: my position remains the same, and I think you don't like Italy; I give up (for me you're a user who creates a lot of confusion, but it's my personal idea, perhaps wrong). JacktheBrown (talk) 16:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

@Sapsby: it's not an accusation, but a doubt. Have you edited from this IP? Special:Contributions/190.63.96.117; the changes are very similar. Answer sincerely. JacktheBrown (talk) 17:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

No, why? Sapsby (talk) 08:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Sapsby: perfect, thank you. JacktheBrown (talk) 14:17, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

@Sapsby: in addition to not having reached consensus, now you accuse me? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cappuccino&diff=prev&oldid=1240128266. JacktheBrown (talk) 17:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

The ingredients section is incredibly confusing - it never explicitly says the ingredients and is also written like an essay. Bonelesssboiz (talk) 00:27, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

@Bonelesssboiz: I agree! JacktheBrown (talk) 02:43, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Please stop edit warring and discuss. Protected 2 days. Valereee (talk) 18:43, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

There was a consensus to include both Austria and Italy in the infobox, as seen in versions prior to February 2024, for example here: . I wanted to change it to include only Austria but did not reach consensus. However, Jackkbrown decided to remove Austria without reaching a consensus and does not accept any changes. Before consensus is reached we should stay to the version including both countries. Sapsby (talk) 12:54, 19 August 2024 (UTC)( Blocked sockpuppet of Xiaomichel, see investigation)

@Sapsby: ; this is a 2020 version. JacktheBrown (talk) 14:03, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

@Sapsby: to obtain permission to add your changes permanently, we must reach a consensus. JacktheBrown (talk) 09:35, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

The second point is that they first removed a referenced statement, claiming it was not reliable, even though it came from a professor of food history. They have now labelled this professor as "controversial" within the article. for no reason. Sapsby (talk) 12:56, 19 August 2024 (UTC)( Blocked sockpuppet of Xiaomichel, see investigation)

Just chiming in after seeing the ANI section but it seems like it's at best a minority view even if he is a specialist (see WP:UNDUE and WP:FALSEBALANCE). If it's a general consensus among specialists, you should have no trouble finding numerous WP:RS to back up those claims otherwise an attributed statement is the best you could add. It's also not the other editors who have to gain consensus to remove something that, as far as I can see, was added unilaterally. I will however agree that calling Alberto Grandi controversial isn't appropriate, even if some of his opinions might be. Yvan Part (talk) 15:06, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

@Yvan Part: totally agree. In addition, the consensus for "Austria" that Sapsby claims to have achieved never existed; anyway, I don't want to be involved in edit wars with them anymore and, therefore, I have accepted their changes (), although they're, probably, wrong. However, this isn't how Wikipedia should work; this encyclopaedia is based on consensus, not obligation. Unfortunately, I was forced by Sapsby to accept their changes.
I would like to wish Sapsby a beautiful day and a good life. JacktheBrown (talk) 12:27, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but why is no one reporting the fact that the user Sapsby - as well as the users Oxbowa, Greyczech, Eduadoros, among countless other IPs - are just the umpteenth sockpuppets of the user until recently indefinitely blocked Xiaomichel (here is also an investigation into his many other confirmed sockpuppets: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Xiaomichel/Archive)? Report these users and you will see that they all clearly correspond to the same person, i.e., that they are all sockpuppets intent on pushing an Italophobic and French chauvinist agenda on food issues.

As you can also see on his talk page, a few days ago the user/master Xiaomichel also deleted the damning evidence of all this inside his profile, in an attempt to avoid being discovered, namely, as you can see by looking at what he deleted, the parts where an administrator wrote this to him on his talk page (that is, what he is, and for which he was then blocked):

Single-purpose account

Hello,

I've reviewed all the edits you've ever made, and it's clear that you are a single-purpose account engaged in tendentious editing. Specifically, you're engaged in a concerted effort to remove mentions of Italian and Austrian origins of French dishes.

While reviewing your edits, I've noticed that you've rewritten articles about pastries to state that they were created by French chefs rather than Italian or Austrian ones, but then often cited articles that contradict your edits and explicitly state that the pastries originated in Italy or Austria.

A brief overview of articles you've edited: : Ravioli and Talk:Ravioli - You engaged in an edit war while attempting to remove mentions of the Italian etymology of the word "ravioli", citing a 13th-century document. After another editor dug up the document and pointed out that it didn't actually say anything about ravioli at all, you admitted that you hadn't actually read it.

Profiterole - You deleted all mentions of the pastry's Italian origins and removed a reference-supported statement about those origins, and instead wrote the pastry was invented by a French chef. The book you cited, Classic Patisserie: An A-Z Handbook, actually explicitly states that pastry is an evolution of one created by an Italian on page 45. : Choux pastry - You rewrote the article to state that the pastry was invented by a French chef, citing the same book mentioned above that states that the pastry was actually invented by an Italian chef.

Draft:The Italian Myth in French Cuisine - You wrote a draft article stating as fact that Catherine de' Medici had no influence on French cuisine; the draft article does not acknowledge that this is a disputed theory, and that many reputable sources state that Medici had a major influence on French cuisine.

Croissant - You had a short edit war during which you tried to remove any acknowledgment of the pastry's Austrian origins. You also added two statements that Sylvain Goy invented the croissant, but more on this below... : Sylvain Claudius Goy - You created an article stating that Goy invented the croissant, but the reference you provided to support this statement is just a for-sale listing for a cookbook written by Goy. You also linked to a blog article which explicitly states that "croissant" was originally the French name for the kipferl, an Austrian predecessor pastry that was introduced to France in 1839. The blog article does support the contention that Goy published the first croissant recipe that used laminated yeast dough, but WP:USERGENERATED explicitly states that blogs aren't considered reliable sources anyway.

I won't summarize the rest of your edits here, but suffice it to say that they all involve you removing mentions of Italian or Austrian influence on French cuisine, often engaging in edit wars in the process.

Please stop.

Stephen Hui (talk) 06:36, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Now he's doing it with Cappuccino, Espresso, Porchetta, 'Nduja, Orzo... but it's always him!

This user uses the mirroring technique to try to blame anyone, in good faith, who restores his chauvinistic vandalisms, of being and doing what he is and does.

Furthermore, in most cases, he adds "sources" presented in a distorted manner and that in reality do not say what he, tendentiously, tries to affirm; decontextualizing a single word or a single sentence of someone or something, to try to build his version of the facts on it.

Have the users I listed checked and you will be able to notice the sockpuppets network and how it acts in bad faith.

Best regards! 87.16.79.110 (talk) 17:22, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion on ANI started by Sapsby. If you believe he is a sockpuppet, it might be worth bringing it up there. Yvan Part (talk) 18:03, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your attention!

Unfortunately I do not use Wikipedia and I am not capable of it. However, reading several pages regarding Italian foods between 2023 and 2024, I was intrigued by several extremely original statements about the aforementioned foods, and investigating a bit on who had inserted them I was able to notice how they all had a single and sole matrix always attributable to the same person intent on pushing a clearly Italophobic and French chauvinistic agenda.

Examine the users: Sapsby,Oxbowa, Greyczech, Eduadoros (but you could also add several others, in addition to an infinite number of IPs) and you will find that they are all traceable back to Xiaomichel, or in any case that they are all the same person with the same objectives, who is trying to muddy the waters about his actions.

I sincerely hope that some administrator - and as has already happened in the past - will put a stop to the destructive edits made by this user who now calls himself Sapsby, as he is heavily polluting Wikipedia with his agenda through a massive network of sockpuppets; considerably undermining the credibility of the encyclopedia and destroying the work of many good-faith users. Pay attention to what I say, and let those who are able verify what I assert. Do something to stop this network of sockpuppets!

Thanks again for your attention. 79.12.74.77 (talk) 19:07, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

IP, we need WP:DIFFs to specific edits that show this. Valereee (talk) 20:10, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

The user in question, when he doesn't do it through IP, always uses different sockpuppets for each new different page he vandalizes, so as not to repeat himself with different socks on the same page: Sapsby, for example, is the sock he uses to deal with Cappuccino and Espresso; for other pages instead he uses (or has used) others. But it's clearly always him!

Check the IP range of the various socks I listed and you will have confirmation. 79.12.74.77 (talk) 20:27, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Furthermore, in his accusations against JacktheBrown, he clearly demonstrates that he knows what happened on those pages because he is always the one who vandalized them previously (and trying, as in any case, to promote his same agenda as always), only that he did it under another name (for example as Oxbowa in the case of Orzo, or in the form of various IPs in the case of Porchetta...etc.). 79.12.74.77 (talk) 20:52, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

IP, you can start an WP:SPI about this. You'll need actual evidence. They'll want more than "Check the IP range of the various socks I listed and you will have confirmation". Valereee (talk) 22:45, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

1) The consensus isn't reached and the article shouldn't have changed until it was.In fact, the consensus was towards having only Italy as origin 2) Grandi is NOT an historian https://personale.unipr.it/it/ugovdocenti/person/20031 and his books are not accepted by the Historians 3) Why only on Italian article there are doubts on origin? I don't see the same criteria applied to croissant, to macarons to paella and other food 4) The account is under suspicion of sockpuppetry and perhaps it's from a french account banned already, renown for vandalism under French and Italian articles 79.21.222.19 (talk) 13:05, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Could you kindly create a profile? JacktheBrown (talk) 13:23, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

I can, but why? It's not mandatory is it? 79.21.222.19 (talk) 16:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

No, absolutely not, but it would be easier to answer you. JacktheBrown (talk) 17:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

Again Xiaomichel. An obvious IP-sockpuppet of Xiaomichel has once again targeted the 'Nduja page, using non-academic sources that report bizarre legends and conjectures (as if the Calabrians of the 19th century did not know about sausages) and that do not directly state what he asserts (as in the case of Britannica, which only speaks of the term and not of the food itself). 80.181.103.99 (talk) 16:01, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, and they will probably move on to other foods too. JacktheBrown (talk) 16:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Also these two users: Rusoscal and Pumconi who vandalized the page Capuchino of the Spanish Wikipedia are obvious sockpuppets of Sapsby/Xiaomichel (they wrote practically the exact same things that Sapsby wrote here on the English Wikipedia; as you can clearly see by looking at their only contributions: ). And he also vandalized the page Café expreso through many IPs; eliminating its Italian origin and trying to transform it into something French... 79.12.77.9 (talk) 16:28, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok I see there has been a mess here, @JacktheBrown the info box should match what is said in the article and it is clearly a preparation that originated in Austria before becoming a classic italian beverage. Try to discuss instead of making accusations everywhere Enamait (talk) 16:02, 27 August 2024 (UTC)( Blocked sockpuppet of Xiaomichel, see investigation)

The article says cappuccino as we know it's different because prepared with espresso. That's the consensus 79.21.222.19 (talk) 11:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

The info box is here to match the content of the article, Austria is clearly a protagonist in the origin and shoud be included. Enamait (talk) 12:41, 28 August 2024 (UTC)( Blocked sockpuppet of Xiaomichel, see investigation)

No, it's not Xiaomichael. Cappuccino is clearly different than kaputziner 79.17.172.126 (talk) 12:49, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Cappuccino is Austrian, originally named kapuziner 213.208.157.39 (talk) 18:59, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Capuccino is different from kapuziner 79.17.172.126 (talk) 15:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Very different. JacktheBrown (talk) 06:54, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

The following is not accurate: "Kapuziner remained unchanged on some Austrian coffee menus and in Bratislava, Budapest, Prague...". It gives the impression that you will find a type of coffee called "Kapuziner" in these cities.

I lived in Prague for 10 years and still regularly visit. I have never seen anything described as "Kapuziner", whereas capuccino is of course as well known there as anywhere else. I would bet that the same applies to Bratislava and Budapest. There is however something called Videňská káva (Viennese coffee) which looks a bit like the "Kapuziner" in the picture.

HairyDan (talk) 18:54, 27 February 2025 (UTC)