Talk:Maple syrup

Hi all, I'm wondering if this article would be suitable for Today's Featured Article on the Main Page in October of this year or next year. I mentioned the article as a possibility at WT:TFA, and one person said that it looks "rough". Thoughts? I have no objection to some kind of formal article-vetting process at WP:URFA or elsewhere if that's needed, but I see a lot of conscientious editors in the edit history ... so, I'll leave it up to you folks. - Dank (push to talk) 22:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

@Guerillero: What were your specific concerns? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:17, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Nikki, good to see you. Btw, apologies, I had it on my to-do list to make this post asking about a possible TFA rerun, but it didn't get done until yesterday ... oops. I really like this article and I think it would be good for October, but there's no rush ... next October would work just as well, if anyone wants more time to work on it. - Dank (push to talk) 17:21, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I just got a request to move this TFA rerun to July 1 or July 2 ... works for me, but I'm open to other ideas. - Dank (push to talk) 15:26, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Almost a year later: I've checked the edits since mid-July, nothing jumps out at me as a problem. I'll read this through again tomorrow, but at the moment it looks good to go for TFA. Any objections? I'm planning to schedule this one (on July 2 ... Flag of Canada will be on the 1st) as soon as Wehwalt finishes up June, which will be soon. - Dank (push to talk) 05:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria:

Maple syrup: Canada’s gift to the world (like all statscan pages it has open rights copyright)

In 2023, Canada produced over two-thirds of the world's maple syrup, with most being exported to 68 countries, primarily the United States, which received $376 million worth, mainly going to Illinois, California, and Vermont. Canada's exports to Europe were significant, totaling $163. 4 million, with Germany, France, and the UK as the top markets. In 2023, Canadian producers harvested 10. 4 million gallons of maple syrup, down 40. 1% from 2022 due to severe weather affecting production. Despite a dip in exports, shortages were offset by using Quebec's maple reserves, now at their lowest level since 2008 Moxy🍁 04:54, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Added, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

The lead is beautiful and perfect and should be emulated by the rest of Wikipedia. It actually feels like what you might read in an encyclopedia entry. It gives the important details in a succinct paragraph that a 5th grader could write, that is easy to write and has few links, no citations, no or few jargon and little required knowledge going in. In addition there's no stagnation of too much knowledge like in some posts, where a whole historical context is given because it happens to be a topic of the ARTICLE, but not the PRODUCT today.

Basically, I'm nobody. But I found this lead beautiful, and beautifully written and actually worthy of emulation in other articles. 2600:4040:AEBA:C200:B871:83E8:B94F:1A5A (talk) 07:10, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

I found it curious that the article mentions "density" only in the context of sugar content. I bring this up because my memories of maple syrup as a kid in the 1960s is different from today; I remember it being more viscous. Today's maple syrup is quite runny by comparison. I know the product would get more viscous the more water is removed from the sap, but I'm wondering if producers in the past tended to make maple syrup with a higher sugar content, which would also be more viscous. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:24, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Different grades of maple syrup have different viscosities.....but temperature also affects "thickess"

• Ngadi, M. O.; Yu, L. J. (January 1, 2004). "(PDF) Rheological properties of Canadian maple syrup". ResearchGate. Retrieved July 1, 2025.

Moxy🍁 14:46, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Well, that sort of makes my point. That article is from over 20 years ago, before the current grading system took effect. All the maple syrup I find in stores nowadays are runny compared to the thicker stuff I remember from my childhood, regardless of color. I can speculate that the reason is to maximize profit margin; it's cheaper to sell 66° brix syrup than to cook more water out of it and sell 75° brix syrup instead. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:58, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

The minimum Brix requirement has actually increased over time - it used to be 65, versus 66 for modern Canadian and 66.9 for Vermont. Higher density syrups are more likely to have issues with crystallization. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:18, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

The article mentions under production that "Sap is often boiled in a "sugar shack" (also known as a "sugar house", "sugar cabin", "sugar shanty", or cabane à sucre)". Two of the references are the North American Maple Syrup Producers Manual which refers to it as a sugarhouse. The manual goes on to say that "sugar shack" is an alterative name for a sugarhouse, not the other way around as the article implies. Sugar shack appears to be a regional or lesser used term and not widely used by producers. I didn't want to just make a wholesale change without discussing it first.

There's also a "Sugar Shack" article which states that "sugar shack" is the most common name without any sources to support that. I can't find any support for that statement, let alone why "sugarhouse" forwards to that article. This is despite evidence that maple syrup production is done in a place called a sugarhouse according to the producers manual and other places that discuss production.

What do others think?

CTMapleKing (talk) 13:41, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm not seeing anything in either this article or sugar shack about one or the other being more common - could you clarify what you're referring to? That being said, Ngrams suggest that "sugar shack" has become (slightly) more common than "sugar house". Nikkimaria (talk) 05:06, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Both articles talk about the production of maple syrup. Both articles say that production occurs in a "sugar shack". However, the main source about maple syrup production, (the North American Maple Syrup Producers Manual), refers to that facility as a sugarhouse. The articles go on to say that "sugar house" is an alternative name which implies that maple syrup production occurs in a sugar shack and the primary source on that doesnt support that claim.

It looks like you did an Ngrams comparison of "sugar shack" and "sugar house" (two words) however, the facility where maple syrup is produced according to the producers manual and other sources is a sugarhouse (one word). Ngrams clearly shows that as being more popular over "sugar shack".

I'm suggesting that if were going to talk about maple syrup production, shouldn't we use the term that sources support? The articles don't even use the proper spelling. My proposal would be we use the term that producers use? Not only does the manual state that but

other sources as well use that term:

https://maplemuseumcentre.org/post.php?pid=13

https://mapletrader.com/community/forumdisplay.php?54-Sugarhouse-Design-and-Construction

CTMapleKing (talk) 12:19, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

In addition to my other reply, I took some time to document what different sources such as maple syrup research, institutes and producer associations call the place where maple syrup is produced. Some referenced it, others did not. For those that did, sugarhouse was the primary term used. Sugar house and sugar shack were also used but not as prominently as sugarhouse.

The North American Maple Syrup Producers Manual

https://mapleresearch.org/pub/manual/ Pgs.12-1 & 12-2

"At a minimum, the maple production facility (variously known as a sugar shack, sugar cabin, sugar shanty, or cabane à sucre, depending on its geographical location, but most commonly called a sugarhouse)"

International Maple Institute

https://internationalmaplesyrupinstitute.com/making-the-syrup

"The four-step process of making maple syrup begins in the trees and ends in the sugarhouse"

International Maple Museum Centre

https://maplemuseumcentre.org/post.php?pid=13

"Room 2 - The Sugarhouse

The name for this building varies with the region and may be called the boiling shed, sugar shanty or sugarhouse"

Proctor Maple Research Center

https://www.uvm.edu/cals/proctor-maple-research-center

"We tap about 6,500 trees to produce more than 3,000 gallons of maple syrup every year in our modern sugarhouse"

"The Sumner Hill Williams Sugarhouse was designed and built in 1993 by sugaring operations manager Sumner Williams, with the assistance of Proctor staff, volunteers, and numerous donations of materials and services."

Cornell Maple Program

https://blogs.cornell.edu/cornellmaple/cornell-maple-program-notebook-series/

"most sugarmakers construct a specialized building for making syrup called a sugarhouse"

Vermont Maple Sugar Maker's Association

https://vermontmaple.org/learn/how-its-made

"The evaporation process sends clouds of sweet maple scented steam billowing from the sugarhouse cupolas and steam stacks. In most sugarhouses, stainless steel pans sit atop an arch, or firebox, where a heat source (wood, oil, wood chips, wood pellets) creates an intense fire."

Maine Maple Syrup Producers Association

https://mainemapleproducers.com/how-maple-syrup-is-made/

"They gather the sap with plastic tubing strung all the way from the trees to the sugar house"

New Hampshire Maple Syrup Producers Association

https://nhmapleproducers.com/

"The New Hampshire Maple Producers Association, Inc. is a non-profit trade association dedicated to the promotion of New Hampshire’s many acclaimed sugarhouses and its delicious maple syrup"

Massachusetts Maple Producers Association

https://www.massmaple.org/about-maple-syrup/

"Maple syrup is traditionally made in a building called a “sugarhouse” — the name of the building comes from the time when most sap was actually turned into sugar."

There's others but I'm not trying to compile a comprehensive list but just demonstrate that the language and the references cited in the articles don't support the use of the term "sugar shack" in my opinion. The language should be updated in the maple syrup article and sugar shack article should be changed to sugarhouse to reflect the sources. I'm not sure how the latter would be done.

CTMapleKing (talk) 14:10, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

I agree. Sugar house is more common, more standard English than "sugar shack" Smallchief (talk) 14:26, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

It appears to be more common in American English, but not in Canadian English, which is the variant in which this article is written. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:36, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

The article states "Sap is often boiled in a "sugar shack" (also known as a "sugar house", "sugar cabin", "sugar shanty", or cabane à sucre)—a building louvred at the top to vent the steam from the boiling sap" and multiple of the sources given to support that do not support that statement. In fact, two of the sources given specifically state that the most common name is sugarhouse. The article doesn't even use the proper spelling of that word either.

I've cited three international institutes, all of which Canadians are members and help write regulations and produce guides such as the North American Maple Syrup Producers Manual. That's not the U.S. manual but the manual used by all producers in North America, of which Canada is part of. The North American Maple Syrup Council which wrote the manual has members from Canada who helped write the manual. They did not object to calling the place where sap is boiled a sugarhouse and the term is there because maple producers know that term.

The question is what do the sources support and with three international sources calling it a sugarhouse, we should use the term that the sources support. Currently, at least one of the sources appears to be a tourist guide which shouldn't be included and doesn't have the same weight as three international sources.CTMapleKing (talk) 12:20, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

To add to my discussion points above in regard to sources and since we're focused on Canadian English, we should use the term that Canadian industry sources use for the place where sap is boiled. In addition to the international institutes I referenced above, Canada has several large companies dedicated to making maple processing equipment and they also use the term sugarhouse. Specifically:

https://elapierre.com/en/filter-press/

"MAPLE SYRUP PRESSES - ADAPTED TO ALL SIZES OF SUGARHOUSE

Our Sirofilter, specially designed for the small sugarhouse, is simple to use, easy to transport and quick to clean"

https://www.cdlinc.ca/en/products-and-equipment/

"Introducing CDL Intelligence, a sugarhouse management system that allows the complete automation of systems and processes."

Both links use Canadian English and return that term.

In addition to those, the Ontario Maple Syrup Producers Association includes plans for sugarhouse design in their resources:

https://www.omspa.ca/useful-downloads

As Canadian entities, appealing to Canadian producers, they all could have easily used the term "sugar shack" in their documentation but chose the term that groups such as the North American Maple Syrup Council (which regulates maple syrup production for all producers) uses.

I think it's evident and without support beyond consumer facing sources that the industry calls the place where sap is boiled, a sugarhouse. CTMapleKing (talk) 13:43, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Why do you believe we should use specifically the terminology of industry sources and not consumer-facing ones? This is a generalist encyclopedia. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:25, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

Why do you believe that we should have text that isn't supported by sources? Currently we have text that doesn't event mention what the source says.

As "generalist encyclopedia", the article uses a lot of proper names for things. It mentions xylem sap, sucrose, the scientific names for trees, talks about the brix content and calcium malate in the sugar sand. If the article was not trying to use proper names, none of those things should/would be mentioned.

All I'm suggesting is that we use the proper name for the facility where sap is boiled. I've demonstrated that it's used internationally on both sides of the border but for some reason you insist that we shouldn't use the text as listed in the listed sources. The article doesn't even have the proper spelling for that facility - it's sugarhouse not sugar house. I'm not suggesting anything other than following Wikipedia's sources policies and have the text reflect multiple reliable sources as to what the facility that processes sap is called. There's no reason why it couldn't be expanded to include other names or even mention that it's popularly called a "sugar shack" in most parts of Canada. CTMapleKing (talk) 13:34, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

I have amended the spelling to "sugarhouse". So we now have text that says that structure has many names, including sugar shack and sugarhouse - that is supported by sources. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:07, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

That's a great start and thank you for doing that @Nikkimaria. I appreciate that.

Since the article covers an international topic and is written in Canadian English, how do we want to further reconcile the text to match what the sources, both primary and secondary support? We should have international sources as well as Canadian sources that support the text.

The current text reads:

"A maple syrup production farm is called a "sugarbush". Sap is often boiled in a "sugar shack" (also known as a "sugarhouse", "sugar cabin", "sugar shanty", or cabane à sucre)—a building louvred at the top to vent the steam from the boiling sap."

I think that section needs to tweaked as it has a few errors. A sugarbush is a forest stand of maple trees that are tapped for sap collection, not the whole operation. That is supported by the noted sources and the article that sugarbush links to. Then we come to what the facility is called where sap is processed.

My proposal for that section would be:

"Maple syrup production begins with collecting sap in a sugarbush. Sap is then most often processed in a sugarhouse, commonly called a sugar shack in Canada but also known as a cabane à sucre, "sugar cabin", "sugar shanty"."

That would accurately reflect the sources, linked articles and acknowledge the Canadian English sources (since it's written in Canadian English) as well other primary and secondary sources that could be added if others think it needs more. I used "processed" as opposed to "boiled" because the article has a processing section that talks about processing and it's not solely boiling. I also took out the part about louvres as sugarhouses/sugar shacks have cupola's with doors that open, not louvres. We could put something in about that but louvres was not accurate or reflected in any source.

What are others thoughts on that language and having that section reflect the sources? CTMapleKing (talk) 00:10, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

I have reorganized the relevant content. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:35, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting unilateral action but a discussion but ok. If anyone else has any thoughts, lets hear them. CTMapleKing (talk) 01:18, 24 February 2026 (UTC)