_Beau_ Junior Member Joined: 28 Oct 2009 Posts: 5 Location: Belgium Expertise: I love coffee
Posted Wed Oct 28, 2009, 6:34am Subject: Wikipedia article on espresso
Hello CoffeeGeeks,
I've been trying to update the wikipedia article on espresso for a few days. The part about the brewing process does not include any technical specifications so I included some and gave a few sources but another editor keeps reverting my edits. Her argument againts them is that there is no defined standard espresso. You can find our wiki discussion here.
I'd like to get the opinion of some other CoffeeGeeks.
Posted Wed Oct 28, 2009, 7:29am Subject: Re: Wikipedia article on espresso
First of all just to say congratulations on a wonderful effort to produce such a reference. I am sure loads of people will appreciate this.
I think when people are asked the precise definition of “what is an espresso”, the generally given answer is pretty much along similar inputs & output factors that you have mentioned. And I think this has come from what the espresso legend himself, Signor Illy, proscribed. Others can quote the source for this I am sure.
But the reality is not so clear cut, and therefore I tend to agree with the Wiki editor that there is no real standard definition, and no officially recognised institution or guardian that enforces this – like say Scotch whisky. So therefore, is it right to put this forward as “the definition” in a place like Wikipedia, where people will consider this as gospel? There are many many first class espresso purveyors who produce wonderful shots who use bigger doses, brew a little longer, brew a little shorter, with less or more pressure etc etc. Does that mean they are not technically producing espresso? Are they therefore producing a triple ristretto, or a double espresso, and therefore not espresso, or something else – even if they call it “espresso”? (which it is!). It can get ridiculous…..
That is why the espresso community have coined the concept of “brew ratios” – being the ratio dry ground coffee in weight to liquid coffee in weight. This seems to have become the accepted framework of what constitutes an espresso, ristretto etc etc, and allows for reasonable variability in inputs and outputs. Have a look: Click Here (www.home-barista.com)
Anyway, I am sure your post will attract a host of different opinions and responses, which in itself will tell you something!
_Beau_ Junior Member Joined: 28 Oct 2009 Posts: 5 Location: Belgium Expertise: I love coffee
Posted Thu Oct 29, 2009, 1:30am Subject: Re: Wikipedia article on espresso
Hi ziobeege72, thanks for sharing your thoughts on this matter.
I agree that there is no standard definition of what defines an espresso and there should be room for experimentation. This does not mean the wiki can not include a definition at all. With the current article, the reader has no clue in what ranges the variables are situated. Surely this could be improved. IMHO one definition should be included, but it should be clarified that this is only one definition and that variations exist, just like you explained in your reply. Including multiple opinions in an encyclopedia should not be a problem and this happens in numerous articles. Just the fact that multiple definitions exist should be relevant to the article.
The brew ratio is certainly a good way to describe the difference between an espresso, ristretto, etc but I think it's a bit out of scope for the article, not wildly used and the ratio is implied by the usual definition.
Psyd Senior Member Joined: 31 Jan 2006 Posts: 1,178 Location: MON AZ Expertise: I love coffee
Espresso: Sylvia and Astoria Argenta... Grinder: Rocky and Astoria (Mazzer)...
Posted Thu Oct 29, 2009, 7:01pm Subject: Re: Wikipedia article on espresso
ziobeege72 Said:
But the reality is not so clear cut, and therefore I tend to agree with the Wiki editor that there is no real standard definition, and no officially recognised institution or guardian that enforces this – like say Scotch whisky.
This is why Wiki is so distrusted. Someone can say something, and until it is contested, it is reality. Th truth is that there is a standard, and it is set by a recognised institution that, at least in Italy, enforces it. INEI not only has a very detailed standard, they are probably the folk that have the closest thing to a right to define and enforce 'what is espresso'.
Not only that, but the standards set for temperature, pressure, and technique at the WBC competitions, (not to mention the SCAE, SCAA, ASCA, and other specialty coffee associations that participate) represent a de facto international standard. So, no, ya can't use Wikipedia to suggest that your steamtoy is a 'real' espresso machine.
_Beau_ Junior Member Joined: 28 Oct 2009 Posts: 5 Location: Belgium Expertise: I love coffee
Posted Fri Oct 30, 2009, 2:18am Subject: Re: Wikipedia article on espresso
This is why Wiki is so distrusted. Someone can say something, and until it is contested, it is reality.
The problem now is that I'm contesting it, but the editors wont let me. And I'm not even claiming there is one definition to rule them all, just that one should be included as a guideline.
I included a reference to the WBC rules in the wiki discussion. Feel free to add your own opinion if you want a voice in the outcome of the wiki article.
Posted Fri Oct 30, 2009, 5:03am Subject: Re: Wikipedia article on espresso
I think what you are trying to argue Beau is completely reasonable, that the INEI's definition is merely one definition spread across a number of different variants, and if that is made clear I cant quite see the problem. It is the definition that this particular organisation uses and I think that would be of interest to wiki researchers which I feel places anyone within a reasonable technical defintion ballpark of what espresso is.
INEI's definition is a useful reference point and certainly provides an admirable attempt in trying to articulate and convey the espresso concept. Although their assertion that only coffee from blended beans can be called espresso is perhaps a little outdated!
But in reality their definition, nor anyone elses, can be held up as being as "the" technical standard defintion of what is "espresso". Espresso has now evolved into such a generic worldwide commodity that it cant be effectively led or directed by a single entity - the product has gone way passed that. But I dont think you are arguing against this point so I think the wiki editors should relax a bit and give you a break!
Symbols: = New Posts since your last visit = No New Posts since last visit = Newest post
Forum Rules: No profanity, illegal acts or personal attacks will be tolerated in these discussion boards. No commercial posting of any nature will be tolerated; only private sales by private individuals, in the "Buy and Sell" forum. No cross posting allowed - do not post your topic to more than one forum, nor repost a topic to the same forum. Who Can Read The Forum? Anyone can read posts in these discussion boards. Who Can Post New Topics? Any registered CoffeeGeek member can post new topics. Who Can Post Replies? Any registered CoffeeGeek member can post replies. Can Photos be posted? Anyone can post photos in their new topics or replies. Who can change or delete posts? Any CoffeeGeek member can edit their own posts. Only moderators can delete posts. Probationary Period: If you are a new signup for CoffeeGeek, you cannot promote, endorse, criticise or otherwise post an unsolicited endorsement for any company, product or service in your first five postings.
= No New Posts since last visit 