Talk:Turkish coffee/Archive 1

Old article

Turkish coffeee is a medium-roast coffee, but due to its small cup size and preparation method, it is similar in strength to espresso. It can be either sweetened or not depend on preference, but is not drunk with milk. Turkish coffee is prepared by the cup. Each cup is prepared in its own small copper pot. The grounds used are very fine and are served in the coffee. The process involves three boilings. First the water is boiled on its own. The pot is removed and the grounds are added. The water is brought to a boil a second time, and removed. Now sugar is added, and the pot is brought to a third and final boil. Take great precaution not to bring it to a roaring boil as that would take away the taste of the coffee. Note, however, that the exact method of preparation seems to vary somewhat; see this page for a slightly different method. Turkish coffee grounds are sometimes flavoured with cardamom.

Kurukahveci Mehmet Efendi

On my last holiday to Istanbul I visited this historic premises, its one of the most prestigous Turkish Coffee brands and produced in the tradditional manner, ground freshly. I must say it is totally so bad, if you get the chance try this, its the Real McCoy Here's the site http://www.mehmetefendi.com/eng/pages/kkme1.html

Byzantium ?

Some fascist Greeks want to erase everything with Turkish. This is another tactic. Since Byzantium predates Ottoman, if they can make people used to the name 'Byzantine coffee" it will later mean that it was actually Greek coffee. I hate these fascist Greeks. It was Arab, then became Turkish coffee then spread to the world including Greece where it was called Turkish coffee until the fascist Greek coup in 1970's. So continuation of Greek coffee names shows how some Greeks are in the path of fascist military regime of 1970's. Reference to byzantium is simply idiotic while there were no coffee drinking while it was alive.

Greek vandalism again

They are reverting the article to make it contain "Greeks opened first coffee shop" without proper and respected citation. They have put some links to commercial greek sites as reference ???

Greek attack on Turkey related articles continues

I am calling wikipedia admins to take a look at all Turkish or Turkey related articles(Ataturk, Seljuk Turks, even Turkish coffee, Turkey, Turkish cuisine etc.) and recently changes has been made by the same users very different varieties of topics, they are continuisly injecting uncitated, baseless POV's. This is a consolidated and suspicious effort to discredit Turkish people using related articles as can be noticed easily.

Untitled

It is stated fildzan is a demitasse (see wikipedia definition of demitasse) which is a half-cup (cca 120 ml). Of course, it can be used for drinking coffee, but fildzan is exclusively a SMALL cup WITHOUT a handle. At least that's the case in Bosnia and other ex-Yugoslav countries. Old-fashioned ones could be ornamented with some arabesque curves, modern ones without it. It's certainly NOT what's pictured on wikipedia's demitasse page. It's important that fildzan is without a handle, so the fildzan can be holded in a palm, and coffee's warmth could be experienced by a consumer - it's a significant aspect of coffee-drinking culture. Real (Bosnian) fildzan looks like this: http://bs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fild%C5%BEan However, I don't know if such a strict definition is hold in Turkey, Greece, Romania etc. I'm kindly asking some good soul to update the article - I'm a newbie on Wikipedia and not self-confident yet to edit articles on my own. Thanks. 26. Dec 2009. Moris JM (talk) 14:40, 26 December 2009 (UTC)Moris_JM

GREEKS ARE TRYING TO RE-WRITE THE HISTORY MISINFORMATION ON TURKISH COFFEE

That first coffee houses were established by Greeks is a big lie. The reference thay give is a commercial Greek food store and claims are not supported by historical records in that website either. There are no historical records yet Wikipedia insists not deleting this lie. Wikipedia should not be a tool to re-write history. Misinforming others is a serious moral crime. Each claim MUST BE SUPPORTED by credible references.

Generally speaking, comments here attract more credibility when they are signed, and when they include lower-case letters. TV4Fun (talk) 20:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite

I have rewritten this article, so I am including the old version here. As far as I know Turkish coffee is never prepared the following way in Turkey. If someone can point out where it is prepared this way, we should reintegrate it into the article. ato 07:00, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

It's not prepared that way in Greece, but it's also not prepared the way the article now says it is. In Greece, the briki is usually straight-sided or only slightly tapered, not narrow at the top, for example. It can also sometimes be boiled (vrasto), but usually is brought to just below the boiling point. --Delirium 23:10, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Stop insisting that Turkish coffee is also known as Greek coffee. Only Greeks call it Greek coffee. Even Arabs call it Turkish coffee even though it is originally Arabic coffee. Stop being so nationalistic. That is true, on in Greece and in Greek restaurants around the world (also occasionally in Cyprus and some Greek Cypriot restaurants), it is known as Greek coffee. But it tastes the same. Time for a kafedaki. Politis 18:09, 1 June 2006 (UTC) I edited information about terms used in different communities. The term “Greek coffee” is used before Turkish intervention/invasion of Cyprus (1974). It might be politically motivated but it is much older. The same apply to terms used in former Yugoslavia. As far I know, they never used term “Bosnian coffee” in Serbia and Croatia. Even in Bosnia and Herzegovina, borders among ethnic communities may be identified by the term they use for this drink. Also, note they have slightly different words for coffee: kava [1], kahva [2], and kafa [3]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.69.85 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 4 July 2006 Well, I deleted "Greek coffee", "Surj" etc. I don't care what others call it. Chinese might call it cong cung coffee. Why is it important? I perceive such attempts as theft of the values of a culture. It is not Greek coffee. Ottomans brought the tradition of coffee to the Western world. They owned the coffee plants in Yemen and introduced this drink to Europe. This is why it is known as Turkish coffee. If you think it is Greek coffee, you should provide the history and reasons for it. I'm deleting Greek merchants lies. Not based on facts. Another Greek fascist propaganda. "turkish coffee" search on google gets 491.000 result "greek coffee" search on google gets 91.000 result So what? Both of them in use but "turkish coffee" is more accepted naturally.

Cardamom

As the article stands, cardamom is only incidentally mentioned. Isn't it an integral ingredient? It would be nice if someone in the know could clarify it in the article. --84.13.10.89 14:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC) Funny: I was going to write just thi ssame thing. --Rmalloy 03:06, 16 October 2006 (UTC) You could add it in, if it wern't constantly protected........... Patch86 18:28, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Pictures

The picture in the Istanbul coffe shop and Cretan implements are great. The how to make the coffee are really confusing, in fact they say nothing at all. That picture needs to be deleted. - Politis 18:25, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I will not object to the proposed deletion. Bertilvidet 11:48, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Surj

Does anybody know what Surj is? It redirects here. Andreas 21:39, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Surj is the Armenian word for coffee, not only Turkish coffee. Turkish coffee is referred to as Armenian coffee by Armenians. Hakob 01:41, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Psychiologic warfare does certainly corrupt reality.If I were an Indian or Maya descendant,I wouldn't refer anything American or Spanish under a different name.--85.97.76.234 16:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Divide into sections?

Nicely done article, very clear. But should it not be divided into sections? After the first part, which can remain untitled, Equipment, Preparation. Then the paragraph beginning "There are other philosophies of preparing.." and ending "as connoissieurs claim—on the palate." could be moved above the paragraph "All the coffee in the pot is poured ..." (into the Preparation section). The paragraph "All the coffee in the pot..." will begin the Drinking section. I think this would make the article a little easier on the eyes. The sections now in place seem effective, so I removed the sections tag. ENeville 06:01, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

History back to Damascus?

I remember hearing that the recepy for Turkish coffee - as cooked on the lands between the Ionian and Caspian Seas - originates in Damascus.

• Secondly, is the Turkish method the original way of cooking coffee in Europe (outside the Americas)? Politis 17:52, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Turkish Coffee is one kind of tea. It'S not a coffee.

Not exactly

Hey, I don't know if the Byzantium reference was apropriate or not, but calling it idiotic is mean, and a can assure you that when Byzantium fell in the early 1400s, coffee drinking was around. Kennethmyers 01:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

You want to provide any reference for that? "Byzantine coffee" is absurd. I've never heard of Byzantine coffee. Hashshashin 14:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Well according to the Wikipedia article on Coffee, the first coffeehouse opened in Constantinople in 1475. Patch86 02:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

And what is your point? Was Constantinople in 1475 still Byzantine? Perhaps you live in an alternate timeline, but such a development in 1475 could be attributed to the Ottomans, and even the Greeks, but not the Byzantines. Hashshashin 21:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

It is, none the less, the same city. I'm not talking about who brought it there or what it was called (I honestly wouldn't know). All I meant was to remind you that the inhabitants of "that city" (whatever we want to call it) were drinking coffee in the 1400s, verifiably. And naming is not always as straight forward as what something actually is.

The fact of the matter is, if there is a sizeable demographic of people (say, Greeks) whocall it Byzantine coffee (due, even, to the 15th Century revival of the term) then it needs to go into the article. It doesn't matter if it makes sense, it doesn't matter if its caused by some old nationalistic rivalry- if there are a large number of people who call it that, even in just one single country, it still merits inclusion. Same goes for the term "Greek Coffee". While it is true that 95% of the world call that beverage "Turkish Coffee", if Greeks call it Greek Coffee, it needs to be mentioned. As is an encyclopedia. Patch86 01:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Agree: never heard of 'Byzantine coffee'. In my opinion, it would have been impossible to have such a term. With the Greek revival of the 15th the term 'Byzantine' gained restricted revival amongst the Greeks, but coffee was not consumed in the empire. As for the term 'Byzantine', it finally gained usage in the late 19th century when the coffee terms had been well established. In fact, speaking with my 'Greek hat', I am alsmost certain that 'Greek coffee' only came into usage in the 1970s. Sorry guys, but 'Byzantine' has to be deleted. Politis 16:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC) Lets also include new names for Turkish coffee if Zairean, Rwandan, Malaysean, Persian, Iraqian, Surinemese, Indonesian, Japanese, Chinese, Mandarinese, Thai, Polish, Polynesian, Australian, Tasmanian so on so on...call Turkish coffee in their own language. Turkish coffee is known as Turkish coffee. Greeks used to call it Turkish coffee up until 1970's. Fascist Greeks should have a Fascipedia. Nationalist or not, facist or not (amid the chorus of pots calling each other black), the fact remains that, in the lands where this method of coffee preparation predominates (e.g. in the former Ottoman Empire) it is known by several names, including, Turkish coffee (admitedly the most common in English usage), Greek coffee and Cyprus coffee (which is distinguished not just by the Turkish-style preparation but by the blend, from what I am told). If the Malays, et al. drink this coffee and identify themselves with it, it ought to be mentioned in an encylcopedia article like this one. It is information which must be recorded. In fact, the controversy itself is worth note as this is clearly a matter of heated nationalistic contention. Corineus (talk) 01:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Merge

Does anyone still want to merge the articles, or can we get rid of the notice? Kennethmyers 01:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I vote not to merge. This coffee, call it what you will, is amply deserving of an encyclopedia article (discussing, among other things, its cultural significance) and, since the preparation method is critical to its definition, we must retain most if not all of the body of the preparation instructions. They could be rephrased to be more descriptive and less instructive, but that is nuance which can be introduced with little revision. It goes without saying, however, that a full recipe ought to be listed on a wiki along with other such recipes (with links to and from this article). Corineus (talk) 02:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Nationalist Manipulation

I am going to remove "greeks opened first coffee shop" statement which is injected without citation, also it is unexpected while coffe is known to the east. Also after years of conquest calling city with old name which is stable and without resistance as "ottoman accuppied" is simply intentional. City was no more constantinople nor there was a byzantium. Utku a

The city was renamed to 'Istanbul' in 1930. This says a lot... Hectorian 05:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you living in a tangent universe or someting? This is bullshit, I am in istanbul as it was since 15th century. Also coffe was known to east and first coffee arrivel to the istanbul short after Turkish conquest is not some kind of coincidence. You are corrupting the article. Stop mentioning your so called thesis as facts withour PROPER citation. --Utku a 07:39, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary, u have provide no source at all... neither academic, nor commercial or respected or whatever... I am reverting the article. and, btw, coffee came from the south. Arabia is in the south of Asia Minor, not the East (unless u believe in a sort of an unheard thesis that the Turks brought it from Central Asia...). Hectorian 08:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Will you mention anything worth reading ? I do not have to provide a source, your are the one coming with the thesis, it is not my duty to disprove it with another sources. This is not kind of "faith" discussion, this is an encyclopedia. Stop corrupting articles with your national beliefs.--Utku a 08:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Ottoman Turks bore the tradition of coffee to Europe from South Arabia. Check your books fascist Greeks. Is anyone messing with Aristoteles? Leave the facts as they are. Ottoman Empire was in control of coffee production until the 17th cc. They took it from Arabs gave it to the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.79.194.241 (talk • contribs)

Protected

I have protected the article, please find a compromise on the talk page. Protection is not the endorsement of the current version. In fact I would like to see more reliable sources than the greekfood website for the challenged fact. Alex Bakharev 06:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC) How about this compromise?

In 1475, the world's first coffee shop was opened soon after the conquest by the Turks in the ex-capital of the Byzantine Empire. According to a legend the shipowners were Greeks [4][5] [6]. That was followed by the establishment of more coffee houses in Istanbul (former Constantinople). Alex Bakharev 07:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Fine by me. as for the nature of the sources, i know that they are not that reliable, but i doubt if in such cases better sources can be found... I mean, it is a legend, like the one on how the Greeks learn to eat potatoes: the soldiers of Kapodistrias were protecting them, so the Greeks thought they were something precious! so, re-wording the current article as "according to a legend", as u propose, seems right to me. Hectorian 18:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Concur.. As Hectorian said, we cannot expect to find concrete sources on this. Baristarim 02:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Then we must NOT put this to wikipedia without reliable resources, this "information" is useless, it is just distracting the reader. I can add any kind of stuff by starting with "according to legend" where is the line for this?. This is Turkish coffee article and this "legends" claims are pretty serious. (I could not join to debate yesterday becouse I was blocked 3RR breaking on this article)--Utku a 07:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Instead of breaking rules and leading the admins to block u, better offer something constructive here... The phrase "according to the legend" or similar, is used in tens of articles. such info is interesting, it does not claim to be "exclusive' or 'absolute reliable', cause it is a legend... thus, i can call your addition of the tag and your message here as "lack to find whatever kind of sources" to dispute that legend. feel free to add other legends! it wouldn't be much of a problem, would it? Hectorian 09:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

A phrase starts with according to legend has no place in a history section of an article. And this kind of expression can not be seen in any respected resource. Feel free to add another section as legends about Turkish coffee. And existence of legend also will be disputed after that, what can be accepted as a legend, an inviduals claim is enough for that? I will remove again, and about 3RR breaking, a smart admin is capable of detecting cooperative reverting(maybe we must create a legendary cheating dicipline of yours) I suppose. I will continue protecting this article.--Utku a 11:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Reprotected - Seems to me that there is still no compromise, judging from the reverts after page unprotection, thus I have protected the page again. --WinHunter ^(talk) 15:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

You guys are crazy, its just a beverage. Many Turks have Greek blood and vice-versa (so chill on the nationalism stuff). Maybe we should all sit around hold hands and sing kumbaya. Lets keep the legend stuff. Naerhu 02:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC) I suggest to create a trivia section and put this "According to the legend,..." thing there, until better references are found. deniz 20:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Third opinion

Third opinion is for when there are two (and only two) parties involved in the dispute. You may wish to consider filing a request for comment if consensus is unreachable here, and everyone involved should remember to be civil. (Pet peeve of mine: Correct typing really does make things easier to read. The word "you" is spelled using three letters, this is not a cell phone IM conversation.) Seraphimblade 11:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Is this an ironic comment on the way i am typing? all my edits on articles are written correctly. my typing in talk pages is another issue (btw, u should had made similar comments to all those users who make grammatical, typing, syntactical mistakes, or who do not use "correct" english with no prose, etc in talk pages...). as for the first part of your comment, there have been opinions presented by Alex Bakharev and Baristarim as well. I do not know how many more opinions are needed for Utku a to think that he/she may be wrong... Hectorian 12:06, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

In general, correct English, spelling, grammar, capitalization, etc., enhances readability of long blocks of text (as are common in talk page debates), so I encourage it wherever I can. As to the debate here, as so many are already involved, I would advise that a request for comment be considered (though it would be best to discuss it before filing) to gain outside editors' input on the appropriate handling of this information. Seraphimblade 12:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

lol, why did this article get protected again?? :)) Personally, I thought that Alex Bakharev's suggestion was very reasonable. From an impartial point of view, I think that it is a fairly balanced way of putting it. In any case, if people want to take it to an RfC, go ahead.. But I just would like to point out the fact that none of us here can claim to have concrete sources about 15th century events. Only sources we have from that period are about important political events, and even they are open to accusations of unreliability from time to time. Nobody should expect to find CNN footage of the opening of a coffee shop or a docking of a ship in a 15th century city. Don't forget that it is a very strong possibility that many things we know about human history can be flawed, exaggerated, balanced or distorted because of a serious lack of reliable sources. For all that we know, it could have been a Chinese merchant from the Silk Road that introduced coffee to Constantinople/Istanbul in the 15th century. I also agree with Hectorian that "according to legend" is a form used in many articles in Wiki. let's remember that the article is already titled Turkish Coffee :)).. I am definitely not taking a position on the issue of the origins of coffee, but I am just trying to have look at this from an editorial point of view. Again, if an RfC is needed, go ahead.. And as for the "you-u" thing, u gotta be jokin'!! :)) Baristarim 21:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Armenian Coffee

When this dispute is over, and the article unlocked, please change the text that says: Armenian Coffee (Armenian: Հայկական քոֆէ) to Armenian Coffee (Armenian: Հայկական սուրճ Haykakan surj) The former is completely wrong, simply a transliteration of the English word into Armenian, when Armenian has its own word for coffee which is by far the most heavily used, rather than the foreign load word of Kofe. I have heard that Armenian is the only language in the world which has a name for coffee that is not derived from the same root, and therefor does not resemble the word "coffee" in English, but don't know if that's true. Would be interesting to find out. Thanks! --RaffiKojian 16:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Why don´t you start a title with armenian coffee? Do you have to write about armenian coffee under the title of Turkish coffee? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.66.86.131 (talk) 20:41, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Inserting legends to articles is not acceptable according to the wikipedia rules.

"According to a legend the shop-owners were Greeks" This sentence must be removed because

1. Wikipedia is not a place for legends.
2. The references for the claim are not reliable. All of them are Greek web sites.
3. Extraordinary claims require much more stronger references. So can i insert to Pizza article that "According to a legend, Pizza is not Italian, but Turkish. Here are my references, if you don't mind they're all Turkish" !?

And furthermore, it must be exactly explained in the article that why on earth only Greeks and Armenians call it sth. else apart from "Turkish Coffee". I know that even Greeks were calling it as Turkish Coffee before Cyrpus dispute. Simply, "Turkish" word is allergic for them.--BlueEyedCat 22:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Who says Wikipedia is not the place for legends? It's not like we're presenting it as an undisputed fact. We specifically say it's a legend. You say the sources are week, but on the other hand you have not provided any sources at all to contradict this. According to WP:V, "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". If you want to explain why Greeks and Armenians have their own names for the coffee, and if you have sources that say why, by all means add this to the article! Regards, Khoikhoi 06:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I hope there will not be editorial contreversies... It is called Turkish coffee, just as we have Brussels sprouts, Cornish pasty, Viennese ice cream or Greek salad... (it gradually became 'Greek coffee' after 1975; Greeks until then used to order it by asking for a 'Tourkiko'). There are references that Greeks also used to run coffee houses in the Ottoman empire; I am not sure if Muslims were allowed to run coffee shops. Politis 23:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Folklore is certainly within the scope of a project like Wikipedia, especially considering recent historiographical trends (q.v. Hayden White) and philosophical trends more broadly. I propose that a full section be dedicated to discussing the identification of this coffee brewing method according to national identities and the traditions associated therewith (e.g. the first coffee shop and its proprietors). Oh, and to glibely state that all Greek websites are sources of misinformation (rather than simply noting the possibility of a bias) is merely a rude and polemical jab. Remember, here in English Wikipedia, both Turks and Greeks are in the minority (a vociferous minority, granted, but a minority nonetheless). The rest of us in the wider world are profoundly unimpressed by the childish squabbling. Corineus (talk) 01:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Turkish coffee

If this coffee did not originate in turkey why is it called Turkish coffee? isn't there a better name including the majority of the users or something. The method of preparation is believed to have originated in Damascus and to have become widespread during the Ottoman Empire - Nareklm 08:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Still thinking that old Tanbur appropriation of Greek culture is 'Turkic' eh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.172.117 (talk • contribs)

The name isn't really an endorsement of anything; this is the English Wikipedia, so we use the most common name in English, which is "Turkish coffee". Other names are also used in English, especially by immigrant communities in the US, UK, and Australia, including "Greek Coffee", "Arabic Coffee", and "Armenian Coffee", so we also list those, but since they're less common we list them after "Turkish Coffee". (I've also seen "Mediterranean Coffee" at a few Lebanese-American restaurants, but I'm not sure if it's common enough to be worth mentioning.) --Delirium 21:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

FYI Arabic or Lebanese coffee is prepared differently to the method described for Turkish coffee.--203.206.220.42 (talk) 05:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Legend

Legend says the first coffee shop was owned by Greeks! What a lie! It was two Syrian merchants. They came to Istanbul opened a coffee shop they became rich and left the city (Source: Uncommon grounds history of coffee). VANDALISM********************TO THE EDITORS OF VIKIPEDIA*************************************** I'd posted a translation from Pecevi an Ottoman historian regarding coffee. I found it deleted and replaced by Greek lies, that are not supported by history. Why is this keep happening? Should we allow fascists to misinform people? You should find these people and block their IPs.

---

Pecevi, an Ottoman historian of the early seventeenth century, writes: ìUntil the year 962 (1554-55), in the High, God-Guarded city of Constantinople, as well as in Ottoman lands generally, coffee and coffeehouses did not exist. About that year, a fellow called Hakam from Aleppo and a wag called Shams from Damascus, came to the city: they each opened a large shop in the district called Tahtalkala, and began to purvey coffee. These shops became meeting places of a circle of pleasure seekers and idlers, and also of some wits from among the men of letters and literati, and they used to meet in groups of 20 or 30. Some read books and fine writings, some were busy with backgammon and chess, some brought new poems and talked of literature. Those who used to spend a good deal of money on giving dinners for the sake of convivial entertainment, found that they could attain the joys of conviviality merely by spending an asper or two on the price of coffee.

Start by reading Wikipedia:Civility. Hectorian 21:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Cardamom

I have been served much more Turkish coffee without cardamom than with. But the article indicates that it is necessary. Should I edit? Or do we need discussion and sources? Jd2718 03:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

True, it is, in my own experience, not necessary to include cardamon (in Cyprus, for instance) so this should be duly noted. In Arabic and Turkic circles, additional spices -- cardamon especially -- are very common, but the brewing method and the particular ingredients are separable and to realise this is perhaps to begin to approach the topic of nomenclature and identity. Corineus (talk) 02:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Why not Turkish coffee

Ok, I'm Greek and I have lived through the Cyprus dispute. They whole "greek" coffee thing started when a Turkish-coffee company (which was Greece-based) decided to take advantage of the invasion of Cyprus with an ad saying "We call it Greek Coffee!" in 1975. Other companies followed, not wanting to lose nationalist customers. It is sad to see that in the information era, we Greeks share nothing with our ancestors regarding our views on historical truth. Also, keep in mind that i'm in university studying "History", so I think my opinion has more weight than your average Greek or Turkish fanatic. Please keep it POV here boys and girls... ;) The only Greek coffee that I know of, is Frapee. It is a coffee made by the Greeks for the Greeks... (even though I prefer the Caphucino) As for the Greek coffee-shop legend, it is nothing more than a poor effort on changing history. It is what other History students at University call "smart quote". It is not lying straight-forward by saying "The first coffee-shop in Constantinople was Greek." It merely suggests that it may have been Greek, since the legend says so. Also, it claims that drinking Frappee is to Greeks a holy moment. Should we add this in the article as well?:P I mean, this website is begging not to be taken seriously! A styl Three reasons: 1) Regardless of the reasons, everyone in Greece calls the coffee Greek coffee at the moment. 2) The coffee is certainly not Turkish, originating in Yemen or Ethiopia. Thus Turkish coffee is as much of a misnomer as Arabic coffee. 3) Turkish coffee is a new name too, they used to just call Turkish/Greek coffee "coffee" in Turkey until the introduction of Western filtered coffee. -Alexius Comnenus

Well there are certain flaws there a) it is how it is called in the English language that counts - not in other countries. The extra info in the lead is still there just because Turkish editors are being nice, I am sorry to say. In English, it is exclusively called Turkish coffee. b) origins are not important - again, what matters for Wikipedia is its most common name in English. If you would like to change that, feel free to write a book c) what it was called in Turkey is also utterly irrelevant per a)

In fact, I would like people to bring in sources to attest that it is called by a sizeable English-speaking community in the world as "Greek", "Byzantine", or "Armenian" coffee. Otherwise it doesn't make sense to have all those other names in the lead, but rather in the etymology section or something. Baristarim 05:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

This style of coffee was "Made in Turkey" in a certain manner that was original and unique. That's the WHOLE POINT! It was originally MADE IN TURKEY - hence TURKISH Coffee. You can argue untill you are blue in the face that it was made by non-Turks but the point is that it was conceived by TURKISH CITIZENS, refined and spreadout by TURKISH CITIZENS, and reached it's present form because of TURKISH CITIZENS - within TURKISH BORDERS that are to this day still are within TURKISH borders. Unless you have a photograph of the birth certificate of the person who invented it, or a "patent", then any argument made here on the "ETHNIC" origin of Turkish Coffee is desperate, irrelevant, racist, divisive, and politically motivated. Here's my suggestion to some people: make your own version of Turkish Coffee, slightly different of course, and make a new Wiki page for it and brag all you want - or whatever it is that you want with Turkish Coffee (I see it going the way of Ouzo, a patent and lawsuit againt any nation who calls it "Turkish"). Or maybe have some PRIDE in yourselves - if possible - and stop stealing other people's cultural heritage.--Oguz1 18:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually That is not entirely accurate (what was written above by Oguz1.... At that time there would have been no such thing as "Turkish citizens" and those who introduced coffee to Istanbul and Anatolia (since it also would not have been called Turkey at the time) were from Damascus and Aleppo, ie: they were Levantine "Shami" Arabs (see Levant, Bilad al-Sham, Greater Syria, Levantine Arabic, and Arabic), Thus they were Syrian Arabs, and would have been citizens of the Ottoman Empire, just as Greeks and Armenians, and Kurds and Turks and most other Arabis would have been at the time as well! Finally The two Syrian Arabs from Aleppo and Damascus of course would have prepared the coffee in Istanbul and Anatolia (wherever it was they set up that first shop) the way they had learnt it from the Southern Arabs and the way in which they developed in the Levaninte and Syrian Arab lands. Since it would not have made sense just to give the coffee to the people of Anatolia and Istanbul, and the Turks, because raw cofee (ie:ben or bun) is useless unless prepared in some way. So to say that the Arab simply brought the raw product to Anatolia, and there is was made into "Turkish coffee" would be completely impossible. Secondly, the very name Kahveh denotes its Arabic origin, since in Arabic is is Kahweh, some say this is from the Ethiopian town Kafa, and this is where the name comes from, however this is unlikeley, as a lingusit would tell you Turkish and Persian Kahveh, is a direct transliteration of Arab Qahwah (pronounced Qahweh in Levantine Arabic - remember those who introduced it to Turkey were Levantine Arabic!) Finally it would have been introduced to Eastern Europe by the Turks, and Western Europe would have received it byway of travelers to the Levant and Istanbul (all the famous Ottoman cities which now prepared this coffee: whether Damascus, Aleppo, Beirut, Athens, Sidon, Tripoli, Antioch, Latakia, Smyrna, Istanbul, Cairo,Alexandria, Yaffa, Jerusalem, etc etc etc) ...LASTLY, everything that came byway of the Ottoman Empire even if they were Arab or Greek were ignorantly called by the Western world as "Turk" simply because they were part of the Ottoman empire. FOR INSTANCE: anyonw who converted to Islam, was said to have "gone Turk" any muslims was called "Turk" be they Arab, Greek, Kurdish, Berber, Italian, or Spanish, simply because Ottoman empire was in power of most major Muslim lands. All of the immigrant from the Ottoman Empire (who were mostly Lebanese and Syrian Christians, and Greeks, Armenians etc etc) were all called Turk, to the extent that thought most immigrants to Latin America were Lebanese and Syrian, mostly Christian but many Muslims and Druze as well, (12 million Lebanese/Syrians in Brazil and Argentina alone!) were all called "Turko" at first, regardless of that fact that they were all Arab and most of them were Christian! Basically anything coming from the various diverse lands of the Ottoman Empire was called "Turk" or "Turkish" (anything strange and unknown to the Europeans ---including the poultry, when they came to the Americas!) regardless of whether it was actually "Turk" or "Turkish". In conclusion, though this coffee is actually Arabic, and Levantine Arabic to be exact, it came to called Turkish coffee, simple since the Arab Levant was under the control of the Ottoman Empire. To be specific, Turkish coffee is more often sweet, and more often served in cups with handles, whereas Arabic coffee is more often bitter, unsweetened, and served in cups without handles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.246.80.212 (talk) 00:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

To all who claim the Greek legend story...

Please stop. If you continue to vandalise Wikipedia, as you did to Turkish_coffee, you will be blocked.

This method of making coffee originated in Istanbul, which was under Turkish rule, and still is. It makes no difference to the ethnic background of the "first person" to make it because they were Turkish Citizens. That makes them "Turkish Nationals" whatever their "DNA" - which makes it Turkish Coffee. Nobody alive can even ascertain the DNA of the "inventor" which as I stated above is irrelevant because they were Turkish Ottoman Nationals and the subjects of the Ottoman Empire. All the rest of claims - and that ridiculous commercial website provided as a "source" - are laughable. Hilarious in fact. Not withstanding all of the above and other complaints, the absolute irrelevancy of the sources cited, the purposeful alteration of the facts, and the repetition of the occurences, I ask you please do not enter any more Greek commercial website refences with anonymous authors and call it a Greek invention. I will report the next person as vandals under [WP:Vandalism#Sneaky Vandalism] (Sneaky vandalism = Vandalism which is harder to spot. This can include adding plausible misinformation to articles, (e.g minor alteration of dates), hiding vandalism (e.g. by making two bad edits and only reverting one), or reverting legitimate edits with the intent of hindering the improvement of pages. Intentionally making non-constructive edits to Wikipedia will result in a block or permanent ban.).--Oguz1 22:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Mister Oguz, I disagree with you. Most people capable of using a computer and accessing the article are also capable of thinking for themselves. They can click on the link and make up their own minds as to whether they believe it or not or consider the sources reliable or not. You are trying to deny them that opportunity! What you are doing is censorship and removal of sourced information.--Domitius 23:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Subjects of the Ottoman Empire, not citizens of a Turkish state. Your antics are not impressive any more are those of the Greek nationalist vandals. Evidently, this is an emotional topic, but let's try to be civil and remember that most English speakers really don't care what specific role, if any, Greek people or Turkish people played in the history of this particular method of coffee preparation. I hope that this is not the case, but let me tell you what it looks like: it looks like some Turks and some Greeks are competing to use this encyclopedia article as a means to spread propaganda and direct the attention of English-speaking people in the wider world (e.g. the US and the UK) to their cause. That would be very reprehensible indeed ... Corineus (talk) 02:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Right. There was no such thing as citizenship before the French Revolution. People could be Greek by definition if they came under the Millet Pasi of their community; for Christian Orthodox this was the Patriarch of Constantinople, spiritual leader of the Rum Millet, or GREEK NATION; so correct me if I'm wrong there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.217.136 (talk) 19:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

According Greeks and Armenians, everything is Greek or Armenian.

especially if explicity and literally says "Turkish", just visit the links below.

Ayran, Yoghurt, Doner Kebab, Kilim, Manti, Baklava, Oklava, Turkish Cymbals, Turkish Goat, Turkish Cat, Turkish Horse, Turkish Kilim, Turkish Raki, Turkish Tea, Turkish delight, Turkish carpet, Turkish bath, [[Turkish Music], Turkish wrestling, and on and on...

So, that means the Greeks and Armenians in reality are Turkish and just A.K.A Greek and Armenian. Now it totally makes sense.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oguz1 (talk • contribs) 17:35, 9 March 2007.

Oguz, they are widely used sourced alternative names, so don't remove them.--Domitius 17:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Sourced? You mean those Greek and Armenian websites? Since when do you care about sourced? You keep deleting "terrorist" from Ocalan and that is sourced from the US State Department. Pleas, who are you kidding? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oguz1 (talk • contribs) 18:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

Normally your additions to Öcalan would be acceptable except it has been decided (not by me - by administrators) that it violates WP:WTA. There is no such consideration here (unless "Greek" ir "Armenian" is a "word to avoid" in your book).--Domitius 18:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I see yor point on WTA about terrorist but I don't see where doner kebab's Armenian translation is relevant to the article and where it is sourced that it's an Armenian dish. Do tell. --Oguz1 18:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

OK I'll give you the "Armenian" - looking back in the page history that was an anon edit. I've restored your version - happy?--Domitius 18:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes. thanks. How about you the same for Coffee...nowhere is it sourced nor is it relevant to the article. We don't go calling it Greek or Armenian Shepherd for German Shepherd even though everybody uses, trains and makes them dfferent. Do we? --Oguz1 18:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Ehh, no. Look at the diff - you're removing existing alternative names, no one speaks of a Greek or Armenian Shepherd. It's customary to include the alternative names used around the world for a particular item, compare with Baklava, I'm sure you agree.--Domitius 18:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Tourkiko

I think the first paragraph has to make it unambiguously clear that it was first known as 'Turkish Coffee' - at least in most SE European countries. For instance, in Greece (also in former Yugoslavia), until the 1970s you simply asked for a 'Tourkiko' (a Turkish), without even adding the term coffee. Politis 15:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I will add some well-sourced information on this. --Macrakis 17:06, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Im a Greek Cypriot, 23 years old, too young to have been around back in the invasion. I was always brought up calling it tourkikos kafes, and ellhnikos has never come into it. in fact, if anything, greek coffee refers to frape, which for once actually was invented by greeks (Y) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.217.136 (talk) 21:55, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Byzantine coffee

There is a web link given to show that Turkish coffee is sometimes called "Byzantine" coffee. I am not sure that one link to a random essay on the Web proves anything at all. After all, a Google search does find it in fully 243 places on the Web (with -wikipedia). Versus 81,700 for "Greek coffee" and 480,000 for "Turkish coffee". And in Greek, it's 27 (mostly about a book by Leia Vitali) vs. 2180 vs. 70. So it doesn't look terribly notable. So I guess rather than explaining that it is ridiculous (since the Byzantines didn't have coffee...), it should be removed entirely. --Macrakis 17:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Euphemism

Where are the actual sources? The Greek dictionary doesn't say that, so what, this is your (Macrakis's) interpretation, opinion, POV, original research, whatever; no? More significantly, it doesn't mention Armenia or any Arab country, so where does that come from?--Domitius 18:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree there aren't sources for Armenian and Arabic; it would be good to get them. So I suppose we should explain only the Greek case as a euphemism; is that what you propose? But the Browning quote is quite clear for Greek. That is not POV or OR. Do you have any sources with other theories for why the name "Turkish coffee" was replaced with "Greek coffee"? --Macrakis 18:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It's OR that it's an euphemism in Greek as well (what source uses that word?!). If all the source says is the text reproduced here, then we might as well just cite that and let the reader decide.--Domitius 18:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

No, the source doesn't use the word "euphemism". It just notes the interesting chronological coincidence of the 1974 crisis and the move from "Turkish" to "Greek" coffee. In a similar coincidence, "French fries" were renamed Freedom fries Macrakis 18:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

I'm not disputing that. I'm saying it's original research to assume that denying the name "Turkish coffee" is a symptom of strained relations with Turkey.--Domitius 18:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

As for "Freedom fries", couldn't the Americans have just called them "chips" like the rest of the civilized Anglophone world.--Domitius 18:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

(Sorry, I hit Save page prematurely. Here is the full comment:)

No, Browning doesn't use the word "euphemism". He just notes the interesting chronological coincidence of the 1974 crisis and the move from "Turkish" to "Greek" coffee. In similar coincidences, French fries were renamed Freedom fries by Republicans when France opposed the Iraq war, and sauerkraut was renamed Liberty cabbage during World War I. Surely it is reasonable to characterize all three cases as "euphemisms". WP:OR does not forbid us from using our heads. --Macrakis 19:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

can someone explain this to me? thanks

"but also under the various national names, which are used to avoid the political and cultural implications of mentioning the former imperial power, the Ottoman Empire, and the current Turkish state"

deniz^T_C 23:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

How much cardamom

For one pot of Turkish coffee (or Arabic coffee), how much cardamom is used? The seeds from one entire green pod, or just one or two seeds? Are the seeds ground together with the coffee? Is the pod also ground, or just the seeds? 24.93.170.200 22:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Like 2 or three seeds are tossed in the pot. They're not ground up - or else the flavor would be murder to your taste buds (literally.) --Kyanwan (talk) 06:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

bosnian coffee

I feel i have insufficent knowledge on the subject to make an edit to the page, but I would like to point out that the name bosnian coffee dose not merley imply a diffrent name for Turkish coffee, but rather a seperate preperation technique involving slightly diffrent equipment. Bosnian coffee is prepared by boiling water in a tea kettle or like device, then pouring that water over the coffee grounds in the bottom of the coffee pot, which is them placed directy on the burner and boiled to achive froth. The coffee is served with sugar cubes, but sugar is not brewed into the coffee as in turkish coffee In addition the Bosnian style coffee pot differs slightly form the turkish coffe pot in that the handle is shorter and sticks straight out form the pot as opposed to the turkish which is longer and is attached to the pot at an upward angle. In Bosnia this style of coffee goes by Bosanska Kava (or kafa) (Bosnian Coffee) or just kava, and in Serbia, although prepared in the same fashion as in Bosnia, it is called Turksa Kava (or kafa) (Turkish Coffee)

We might need to create a section named 'variants', and talk about similarities and differences there. Due to WP:MOS, and WP:UNDUE, we should probably not list all the variants at the beginning. Apparently they are not the same thing (possibly more distinct than Döner, Shawarma, and Gyros). If they are notable enough, it might be good to create an article for them, otherwise they should be put in a variants section. Deniz^T_C 21:40, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

not all greeks vandalize it

i notice some have taken extreme nationalism in this article to the opposite direction and talk generally about how collectively "they" (greeks) are making attacks on the page. i don't care about what is called so stop making such generalizations. --Leladax 08:04, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

As a non-Greek, a non-Turk and a non-Armenian I heartily concur. Corineus (talk) 02:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Correction:Arab Coffee and Turkish Coffee

Although it seems strange, Arab coffee that Arabs call "Turkish Coffee" is quite different from Turkish Coffee. And a Turk who has ever drunk a cup of Arab coffee (which is called Turkish coffee) would not claim that Arab coffee is Turkish coffee. However, as the world learnt what to do with coffee grains from Turks, people keep calling their coffee Turkish coffee (if, of course, they do not have "personal problems" with Turks or Turkish identity).

By the way, people keep making a mistake: there is no point in probing where coffee grains are coming from. What makes a "coffee" "Turkish" is not the grains grown in Turkey BUT the way of making it?! The fact that coffee is imported does not mean that the way of making it is imported as well! --Z yTalk 08:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Liqueur? Huh?

RE: Drinking and Tasseography

"with a small glass of mint liqueur."

Ok, what's the deal with this here? I'm sure in Western/European circles this MIGHT be the case, but in all my years of being an Arab - ( erm, my entire life? ) I've never seen/had this.

I seriously have a credibility dispute with this claim/"fact". In ALL Islamic countries - drinking alcohol is seriously frowned upon. It's quite literally - a deviant activity.

Plus - the voodoo fortune telling & drinking - The folklore should be separate from the preparation & serving of this drink. The two have *nothing* to do with each other. ( One subject is consuming a drink, the other subject is idiocy. Don't quote me on that. But, myth/folklore/etc - should be kept well away from verifiable facts. )

--Kyanwan (talk) 06:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Drinking alcohol is not considered as a deviant activity in Turkey. --Z yTalk 00:08, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Misuse of the term "Turkish"

TURKISH=ARAB, TURKISH=GREEK, TURKISH=MUSLIM, TURKISH=ISLAM, TURKEY=POULTRY....TURKISH=EVERYTHING THAT IS STRANGE OR COMES FROM LAND OF OTTOMAN EMPIRE...THIS IS WESTERN IGNORANCE, WE SHOULD LEARN!!!!!!

Actually That is not entirely accurate (what was written above by Oguz1.... At that time there would have been no such thing as "Turkish citizens" and those who introduced coffee to Istanbul and Anatolia (since it also would not have been called Turkey at the time) were from Damascus and Aleppo, ie: they were Levantine "Shami" Arabs (see Levant, Bilad al-Sham, Greater Syria, Levantine Arabic, and Arabic), Thus they were Syrian Arabs, and would have been citizens of the Ottoman Empire, just as Greeks and Armenians, and Kurds and Turks and most other Arabis would have been at the time as well! Finally The two Syrian Arabs from Aleppo and Damascus of course would have prepared the coffee in Istanbul and Anatolia (wherever it was they set up that first shop) the way they had learnt it from the Southern Arabs and the way in which they developed in the Levaninte and Syrian Arab lands. Since it would not have made sense just to give the coffee to the people of Anatolia and Istanbul, and the Turks, because raw cofee (ie:ben or bun) is useless unless prepared in some way. So to say that the Arab simply brought the raw product to Anatolia, and there is was made into "Turkish coffee" would be completely impossible. Secondly, the very name Kahveh denotes its Arabic origin, since in Arabic is is Kahweh, some say this is from the Ethiopian town Kafa, and this is where the name comes from, however this is unlikeley, as a lingusit would tell you Turkish and Persian Kahveh, is a direct transliteration of Arab Qahwah (pronounced Qahweh in Levantine Arabic - remember those who introduced it to Turkey were Levantine Arabic!) Finally it would have been introduced to Eastern Europe by the Turks, and Western Europe would have received it byway of travelers to the Levant and Istanbul (all the famous Ottoman cities which now prepared this coffee: whether Damascus, Aleppo, Beirut, Athens, Sidon, Tripoli, Antioch, Latakia, Smyrna, Istanbul, Cairo,Alexandria, Yaffa, Jerusalem, etc etc etc) ...LASTLY, everything that came byway of the Ottoman Empire even if they were Arab or Greek were ignorantly called by the Western world as "Turk" simply because they were part of the Ottoman empire. FOR INSTANCE: anyonw who converted to Islam, was said to have "gone Turk" any muslims was called "Turk" be they Arab, Greek, Kurdish, Berber, Italian, or Spanish, simply because Ottoman empire was in power of most major Muslim lands. All of the immigrant from the Ottoman Empire (who were mostly Lebanese and Syrian Christians, and Greeks, Armenians etc etc) were all called Turk, to the extent that thought most immigrants to Latin America were Lebanese and Syrian, mostly Christian but many Muslims and Druze as well, (12 million Lebanese/Syrians in Brazil and Argentina alone!) were all called "Turko" at first, regardless of that fact that they were all Arab and most of them were Christian! Basically anything coming from the various diverse lands of the Ottoman Empire was called "Turk" or "Turkish" (anything strange and unknown to the Europeans ---including the poultry, when they came to the Americas!) regardless of whether it was actually "Turk" or "Turkish". In conclusion, though this coffee is actually Arabic, and Levantine Arabic to be exact, it came to called Turkish coffee, simple since the Arab Levant was under the control of the Ottoman Empire. To be specific, Turkish coffee is more often sweet, and more often served in cups with handles, whereas Arabic coffee is more often bitter, unsweetened, and served in cups without handles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.246.80.212 (talk) 00:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

WHAT SHOULD WE LEARN FROM ABOVE?

1) Aleppo, Damascus and the rest of the lands of the Ottoman Empire were free of Turks! There were no Turk, Turkmen or Turkic population in these regions and in the Middle East in general. For example "Seljuqs" had settled in China! There were no Turks in the world before the Ottoman Empire. HOW ABOUT YU START BY ACTUALLY RESEARCHING AND GIVING NUMBER AND PERCENTAGES OF THE AMOUNT OF TURKISH PEOPLE IN THOSE CITIES VS. ARAB PEOPLE!!! WOW HOW MUCH MORE OF A BLIND ETHNO-CENTRIC PERSON CAN YOU BE????

2) Nothing can be Turkish or of Turkish origin! Nothing could have been DEVELOPED by the Turks. All the things that were developed and spread out all over the world under the Ottoman rule should be either of Greek or Arabic origin. Everybody is ignorant as they call Turkish coffee "Turkish coffee". Turks are barbarian people, incapable of having a cuisine and culinary tradition. NO,MY FRIENDS, DID YOU NOT UNDERSTAND THE POINT THAT EVERYHTING WHICH CAME FROM THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE WAS LABELLED AS TURKISH, INCLUDING ISLAM, ARABS, AND GREEKS, and ANYOTHER MINORITY IN THE ANATOLIA OR FORMER LANDS OF THE EMPIRE, IS THIS FAIR TO THE MAJORITY NON-TURK PEOPLE OF ANATOLIA AND THE MIDDLE-EAST (INCLDUING GREECE)??? PLEASE BE FAIR AND NOT JUST NATIONALISTIC!!!

3) That was NOT the Ottoman Army that laid siege to Vienna and left the sacks of coffee beans behind. HOW WOULD THE AUSTRIANS HAVE KNOWN WHAT TO DO WITH THE COFFEE BEANS HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR THE TURKIS WHO TAUGHT THEM??? HOW WOULD THE TURKS KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH THE COFFEE BEANS HAS IT NOT BEEN FOR THE LEVANTINE ARABS WHO TAUGHT THEM??? HOW WOULD THE LEVANTINE ARABS KNOW ABOUT COFFEE HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR THE BEDOUOINS?? HOW WOULD THE BEDOUINS KNOW ABOUT IT HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR YEMEN??? HOW DID THE YEMENIS KNOW ABOUT IT HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR ETHIOPIA ABYSSINIA???

...as the world learnt what to do with coffee grains from Turks, people keep calling their coffee Turkish coffee (if, of course, they do not have "personal problems" with Turks or Turkish identity)... So you dont agree with it :) You should go to the deserts and check how they make coffee. But we also use sometimes hot sand to cook coffee. Lets call it BEDOUOIN COFFEE then. You keep talking without knowing. You have a thesis but no basis!!!--Z yTalk 09:57, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

We have also a saying that suggests coffee coming from Yemen :) What makes a "coffee" "Turkish" is not the grains grown in Turkey (?) BUT the way of making it?! The fact that coffee is imported does not mean that the way of making it is imported as well. --Z yTalk 10:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

4) Whether the coffee cups have handles is crucial to the difference between arabic coffee and Turkis coffee and relevant to the discussion about where and by whom Turkish coffee has been developed.

5) Turks have their coffee sweet?! They like sweet so much that sugar put in the coffee is not enough and that's why the Turkish coffee was almost all the times served with lokum! ARABS DO NOT EVEN PREPARE THE COFFEE WITH SUGAR, THUS THUS IS AN EXCLUSIVELY TURKISH THING TO PREPARE THE COFFEE WITH SUGAR!! GET IT?? I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT ADDING SUGAR LATER, WHICH IS SOMEONE'S CHOICE

6) 99.246.80.212 has never drunk Turkish coffee. 99.246.80.212 has been told that whatever he/she was drinking was Turkish coffee.

7) And I am a blind nationalist. But 99.246.80.212 is an impartial person. VERY ACCURATE, A VERY BLIND AND NATIONALIST PERSON YOU ARE INDEED!!! --Z yTalk 11:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

WHAT WE SHOULD LEARN FROM BELOW THE ABOVE

That it seems the Turks on Wikipedia have misrepresented their own nation, as blindly nationalistic, uncompromising, deniers of history, xenophobic, brainwashed by the dreams of attaturk, and above all else ignorant, arrogant, and without any love of truth, research, and academia, only acceptance of terms and mythology spread in the 19th and 10th centuries, and forcing all others to accept these too, based on force and strength. This seems to be a repeat in history of the Ottoman Empire, when the whole region declined while Europe would speed ahead, and actually become more advanced than the middle east, because of the Ottomans only wanting military conquest and and territorial conquest, not concerned with education, services, advancement etc etc, resulted in the ultimate stagnation of the middle east until today. The Turkish Wikipedians here seem to be continuing this tradition,wishing to blindly label everything according to their nationalist aspirations, as opposed to actually studying history and researching the histories of the nations they came to co-exist with, instead they wish to use wikipeida to fabricate and spread their blind nationalist history to the world. This is not real Turks, I know real Turks, and they are great people, kind, honest, and sincere and they know that their culture and heritage is the result mostly of the cultures they interacted with in the Middle East, otherwise they would feel completely at home with the people of Mongolia or Kazakhstan (which of course though they share similar core basic elements, they today are completely different), The cultures of all the peoples in the Middle East, Near East, Eastern Mediterranean (whatever you wish to call it) be they Greeks, Arabs, Turks, or Kurds, have all highly influenced eachother, and there is no shame in this to all those blind Greek nationalists and Turkish nationalists, you people are really backwards,and just look at the treaty of Lausannes the young Turk coup, etc etc,the kemalist reforms, to see how perverted,backwards, malaised,twisted and backwards some people can be, and the way in which they think, it is pathetic, just read the debates on turkey in Europe, it is soo sad to read that these people are actually allowed to write on wikipedia, so sad. The Turks want to be in Europe for unfounded ignorant reasoning, and the Europeans do not want Turkey in Europe also for unfounded ignorant reasons, Europe until this day do not realize that they owe most of their renaissance to the Middle East, without which they would still be in the dark ages. And Turkey does not realize, that like Europe, most of what they know came from the Middle East, unlike Europe, Greece and Turkey developed culturally with the Middle East, (since there was nothing in Europe, absolutely nothing, go read history!) however some people are too blindly nationalistic to accept history, and are too racist and xenophobic, andjust wish to be with whoever is strong at the moment, had the middle east and the arabs been in a position of strength, then sicilians, maltese, would love to be associated to arabs, and turks would love to be associated with the middle east. Some people just wish to follow the powerful as opposed to historic truth, do some research as opposed to just writing articles on wikipedia that conform with you nationalist desires, this is really pathetic, I have yet to find any group on wikipedia less academic and more blindly nationalist, anyways good luck and I hope you can see my point, and maybe atleast make a window in these high walls you have built. Take Care :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.246.80.212 (talk) 15:07, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I had already understood your point the wikipedian. However, you did not get my point. The hysteria of "misrepresenting" the "truth" of Non-Turkish Ottoman nations is at least at the same level as that of the barbarian blinded Turks :) By the way if I had found anything false and far-fetched on the text page, I would have reverted them. So "misrepresentation" of the truth is simply an accusation with no obvious foundation! I am the last person who would deny cultural exchange in these lands. However I am surprised when I see people who can easily leave Turks out of this cultural exchange and who can easily deny Turkish contribution (!), no matter how barbarian and underdeveloped you want them to be?! In addition, you keep contradicting with yourself on every occassion. Let's see an example:

-HOW ABOUT YU START BY ACTUALLY RESEARCHING AND GIVING NUMBER AND PERCENTAGES OF THE AMOUNT OF TURKISH PEOPLE IN THOSE CITIES -THE MAJORITY NON-TURK PEOPLE OF ANATOLIA AND THE MIDDLE-EAST

The discussion about who was in the majority and in the minority is pure non-sense and not useful for your own argumentation but you are too angry and sad(!) to realize it.

However, claiming that everything developed under the Ottoman rule has to be non-Turkish needs to be analyzed.

No matter how many Turks you know, the current of your thoughts give hints about how objective you are, please re-visit above: WHAT WE SHOULD LEARN FROM BELOW THE ABOVE.

I dont want to repeat what you say above. On the other hand I can not help wonder what your problem with Ataturk is as you has involved him in this discussion. This is not Turkish nationalism that makes baklava, doner, coffee, dolma, Turkish. This is history, tradition, etymology etc.

The point before the last one, Arabic coffee that they call Turkish coffee by mistake (and probably this is where your argument can be applied - by reason of the Ottoman domination) is not the same as Turkish coffee. By the way, Turkish coffee is TRADITIONALLY bitter. That's why it is TRADITIONALLY served with lokum. Making Turkish coffee with sugar is a 20th century invention probably.

Last point, in order to understand Kemalist reforms or Turkish revolution as a whole you should know more. Literally. I recommend you not to swim in deep waters if you dont have an idea about swimming.You may be funny otherwise. --Z yTalk 09:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

REPLY TO ABOVE

Hello

you say I reply in an angry way however I have yet to reply to you with the insulting arrogant way you reply, I only discuss history and facts, whereas you do not even bother, you simply accuse those who have a different opinion or different knowledge than you, as being stupid, unlearned, and unknowing. However you have yet to provide factual evidence which proves any of your claims, they are all simply based on empty nationalism my friend.

You claim I know nothing and I am trying to swim in a deep ocean, my friend I have not only reached the botton of that ocean, I have reached the buttom of the deepest river with the strongest current, and I will take you with me and return you dry and thirsty if not completely drowned. Please wake up and stop reverting to insults and accusation of others stupidity to enforce your arguments and personal emotional beliefs.

You and those like you have done Turkish heritage a great injustice by showing that there is only hot-air and arrogance, falsification and manipulation of history and simple blind labelling, and the reliance on the acceptance of ignorant westerners of such labelling (including the labelling of Turks as Europeans) through superficial reforms (changing to Latin aplphabet and wearing western clothes) accepting these creations of "Turkish" identity.

Please accept the truth, re-read history, and read with an open mind and heart,and dont read with a defensive nationalistic feeling. No one is saying Turks are barbariansand have contributed nothing to Middle Eastern and East Mediteranean culture, of course they have. But Turks needs to accept they were the latest group (save Zionists) to arrive to the Middle East, and please do me a favour, try writing to me an essay in Turkish using entirely Turkic words, I can write to you volumes and volumes in Arabic without using any foreign non-Semitic words, you cannot even say hello to me without using an Arabic word my friend. Please show me an expression of Turkish culture which is entirely Turkic and appears to be uniformly paralel to that in Kazakhstan.

Tell me does it seems realistic to you that Turks came to Yemen, found the coffee brought it back to Turkey and created that beverage we all know and love throughout the Near East, North Africa, and East Mediterranean region?? that the Arabs never used this coffee and maybe simply ate the beans?? even though it is the major drink of every Arab more than tea, whereas Turks are known to drink tea more than coffee. The coffee of the Bedouins and of Ethiopia is so closely related to Arab Levantine coffee that you cannot but say Arab Levantine coffee is a direct descendent from Ethipian and Bedouin coffeemaking. Do you really believe Turks taught all the Arabs how to make coffee?? havent you yourself read the Turkish history of coffee which is actually on this same page?? would you accept with a clear conscious to claim a historic Turkey pre-1920s??? would you with a clearn concious claim a historic standard Anatolian Turkish language pre-1920s?? would yourself with a clear-conciosu claim here to me and to all of us the unlimitied wide-spread use of the term Turkish (and not by Westerners) by all Middle Eastern and East Mediterranean peoples (including Anatlolian Turks) before the 1920s??? Please provide evidence, and stop being simply nationalistic and arrogant and accept that though you are a Turk, today you are Anatolian, Middle Eastern and East Mediterranean and you are no longer Kazakh or Uyghur...accept history without this blind nationalistic labelling and artifical creations. However if you can still use this term Turkish, with a clear concsiou and true academic and scholarly initiative, then we have no more debate here.

Take Care my friend, and I hope you can learn to reply, and thus do your side of the story and argument much better justice, without lame accusations and rude insults,and simply empty arrogance and hot air, and actually reply with facts and historic information.

And by the way I am Turkish from Istanbul, though I am originally from a Bulgarian family before Lausanne, Istanbul, which was a city almost empty when the Turks conquered it (as opposed to what arrow minded westerners and Europeans like to believe)and was repopulated with mainly Levantine Arabs, Christians, Jews, and to a lesser extent Muslims, as well as Turks and Greeks, but if you accurately learn the history of Istanbul you will learn this and the origins of their culture, and please tell me about the "Turkish" heritage of Western, Eastern, Southern, and Northern Anatolia, and not just Central, please I will love to hear it. Believe me I could teach you volumes from my research on Seljuk Turks, Ottoman Empire, and finally Kemalism, I do not think I could leand anything from you as you ahve only learnt and only speak what you were taught by your state and brainwashed by their curriculum and by your parents, you seem to have done no independent research or accept anything which refutes the blind "Turkish" label they have brainwahshed you to enforce on anything and everyhting,,,, and though English is my first language I speak fluent Turkish and Arabic, as well as French, Greek, and Italian. I dare you to reply to this message in pure Turkish without any Arabic or Persian words,I promise you that more than half of the words you use will be Arabic and Persian, the other on tenth will be of European or Latin origin. We need to for once accept history and stop this blind labelling....Cheers, Take care and good luck, and maybe you can for once reply with some decent debate, and conversation as oppose to furthering proof of your empty arrogance and proof that you actually to read something, and not just insults and accusations that those who disagree with you or have a different perspectice, simply do not know!!if you only knew how much I have read and researched on these subjects, and how much I love Turkey and it being the land of origin of my parents and grandparents (my great grandparents being from Sofia, Bulgaria) it is my main interest!! Please wake-up...Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.254.250 (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Impossible to reply above

1) I never insult, degrade, despise people, especially in this kind of debates. Do not reflect your own manner of behaviour on your counterparties because it gives the impression that I am just wasting my time talking to people who has nothing else to do than attack on every occassion without saying much?! After a point you are mixing up everything..what we are discussing has lost its importance?! If I had had counter arguments concerning the origins of Turkish coffee, I would have brought them months ago as I already said. What factual evidence am I supposed to provide and for which argument? That the Ottomans/Turks spread the coffee all over the world? Well I think both you and main text have confirmed it?!? What are we discussing now? Turkish coffee? Turkish language (according to you, there is no such a thing though. However I could not help wonder whether you know that official languages of these Turkic Empires were Persian and Ottoman (a mixture of Turkish-Persian-Arabic))? Turkish revolution? What? Which one?

You are so confused that it is impossible to resolve all matters that you set out here. Pick up an example. Your arguments presuppose the existence of an hierarchy of cultures defined in accordance with the chronological history?! Chronology is misleading cause it tends to generalise, categorise too much. An example: If you had been as knowledgeable as you pretend to be, you should have known that Turks entered into Anatolia not after 1071 as the history books write but under the early Byzantine rule as being soldiers of the Byzantine Army. You should not have started Turkish history in Anatolia and Balkans by 1071. So brainwashing, learning things by heart, prejudices and fixed ideas could also manipulate you!

You keep scattering out your darts (opinions) about a range of topics and believe me it seems that you match exactly the profile that you describe yourself above?! The worst is that you are incapable of seeing what you are doing. So "you simply accuse those who have a different opinion or different knowledge than you, as being stupid, unlearned, and unknowing" + brainwashed, racist, blinded by nationalistic ideals, superficial etc.

2) "Do you really believe Turks taught all the Arabs how to make coffee?" Another frustrating thing in this kind of "debates" is being accused of things I have never said! Only thing I dared to say my wiseacre friend is that the coffee known as Turkish coffee in the world was the coffee that was developed in Istanbul! Yes. So what is known as Turkish coffee today is not the coffee that Bedouins make?! The fact that Bedouins were making coffee before Turks does not constitute a counter argument to that. At least logically!!! Istanbul's history! I am not you. I can never ever claim that a region's history can be identified with the history of a race?! Especially if we are talking about crossroads such as Istanbul or MIDDLE EAST! By the way your story about Levantine Arabs being imported to Istanbul after the conquest is exaggerated. You read a book and adore it obviously! Who was imported? MAINLY ARMENIANS, GREEKS and TURKS! Sorry for the inconvenience if there is! So how did we come here? Who knows? Your free-association needs a Freudian analysis!

3) You do not and can not become impartial, objective, wise, not brainwashed, open minded by saying that you are so? You have to show it! I found it childish to say that you can teach me volumes??!! How old are you my friend??? Just start by being fair!

4) I am quite curious about your essays to be written in pure Arabic, French, Greek, and Italian?! By the way, you can not be really saying that there is no relation between the Turkish language spoken in Turkey and in Kazakhistan or Azerbaijan? The fact that Turkish spoken in Turkey has many loan words does not make it unrelated with Turkic languages as you know. It does not make it arabic either needless to say :)

5) I dont care how much you or one likes Turkey. That is utterly irrelevant!

--Z yTalk 13:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Well it is relevant, because some love Turkey (Anatolia) for what it is, in all its cultural and historic diversity, and then some like you, can never be capable of looking beyond their blind, superficial artificial fabricated Kamalist Nationalism, and are so loyal to their brainwashing "re-educational" curriculum, even when they beleive they are being intelligent and open minded! Yes the lands of Anatolia and Middle-East and East Mediterranean were very heavily populated by Turkic groups since before 1071!!! hehehe, you need only to research the Kemalist "sun-language" efforts to see how much falsified nationalistic dogma you truly adhere to, though you still beleive you are superior to others in intellect! yet lack the capability of free thought and open research! The fact is Turks were even a minority in Anatolia (save the Mideast, EastMediterranean!!) until the early 20th century!!! re-read your history by Kemalist Nationalist eager child...re-read..learn, and enough arrogance and ignorance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.137.191 (talk) 17:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

You are out of your mind. I have tasted coffee that was called Turkish coffee in Middle East and also in the middle eastern retaurants in Europe and realized that they were simply not the same! Your problem with kemalist ideology, if there is one?! cause I doubt it, does not concern me at all :) Needless to say, it has nothing to do with being a minority or majority in Anatolia. By the way, there are other places to throw up your "love" for Turkey and Turkish people or whatever you love. Decency! --Z yTalk 17:15, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

"Cypriot coffee"

In the English-speaking communities of the Republic of Cyprus, it is more commonly referred to as 'Cyprus coffee', not 'Cypriot coffee'. The former is seen on menus. However, when ordering, the Anglophones usually use the bastardised Greek 'sketo' (unsweetened), 'metrio' (half-sweetened) or 'glyko' (sweet). Since 1974, it is decidedly a faux pas to ask for a 'Turkish coffee', although this was acceptable in the 1950s and earlier. In the illegal "TRNC", the term 'Turkish coffee' is the norm.--Devilinhell (talk) 08:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Quite right, although I was informed that the Cypriots (or at least those living in the Republic of Cyprus) also distinguish their coffee by the particular blend (or blends), not just by the preparation style which, the same informant admitted, is what is more widely known as "Turkish coffee". As for the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, it would probably be more tactful to call it "unrecognised" (except by Turkey) rather than "illegal". There are many entities and activities out there which are, by someone's law, "illegal"; to emphasize it in this case carries with it the ghost of a value judgement. In any event, whatever this coffee ought to be called, it is deeply cherished on the isle of Cyprus.Corineus (talk) 02:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

"botz"

the claims made in the last paragraph of the names/variants section seem unsubstantiated an need to be verified, or else they're complete bullcrap, especially the last part that discusses the association of 'botz' with 'young and dynamic people' and the parallels with Marlboro cigarettes. I would like to know where it comes from. also, I'm a young Israeli (27) and it doesn't seem like there's a decline in the use of 'botz' vs. 'Turkish coffee'. the part later in the article about confusion at what a 'finjan' actually is, also needs to be proved. IMO there's no confusion at all, as people from very different age groups can usually describe the same brewing vessel, which is quite distinctive in it's shape from other vessels in the Israeli cuisine. I think it's okay to delete most of these paragraphs if nobody backs them with evidence during the next months. I would, however, leave the sentence about it being called mud ('Botz') in, as it is a unique name (compared with the other names it has, mostly derived from national or geographic zones) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.70.122.190 (talk) 08:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

How close to the rim?

I understand that the liquid and kaimak must touch the rim of the cup, it must be level with the rim. Is that correct? Politis (talk) 10:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Level, if you can. Serving coffee without spilling is considered a skill in Turkey. Also, more "kaimak", the better. Turkish call "kaimak", "köpük" which roughly translates to bubble. Heruamarth (talk) 11:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

THere is a difference

THere is a difference between Armenian, Greek and turkish coffee. This wiki page is really miss informing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.161.104 (talk) 00:22, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Just an extra info about Coffee becoming depopularized by tea in Turkey

• When the Englishmen took the arabian peninsula away from the Ottoman Empire, and France occupied Syria, the coffee route to the Capital City of Constantinople was cut. This very bitter experience for Turks, made them look for an "erzatz" and tea plantations were brought in from India & Iran and effectively planted in Northern Turkey, not far from the Black Sea coast.

• Another funny aspect I'd like to share with you about the psychological war between Greek & Turkish Coffee Makers about the name changing, is the fact that in the 80's in Turkey, (particularly in Istanbul) Russian salad to be marketed under the name American salad... Aaah the good cold war days!!

Cheers!

--Emir Ali Enç (talk) 15:32, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Consumption is somewhat declined, but coffee is far from not being popular. Turkish coffee has always been a bit ceremonial, served with a delight and a glass of water, the way it is brewed, etc. The instant coffee, availability and practicality of tea, availability and the "hype" of "other" coffees like espresso made this even more significant. Today coffee is still present in many homes and the drink of choice for a welcome friend or guest.Heruamarth (talk) 11:53, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

On second thought, maybe I'll edit this part, and add something like that. Any opinions anyone?

Turkish coffee is still popular, especially among the office workers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.196.115.88 (talk) 10:40, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Need help with centimeter to inches conversion tool ...

Under the "Equipment" heading is the following sentence "The dipping parts of the teaspoons in these countries are about 1 cm (0 in) long and 0.5 cm (0 in) wide."

The article uses a "convert" algorithm with which I am not familiar and have been unable to decipher.

Would someone possessing further knowledge than I please add some decimal points to the "convert" statements so the inches values (0.4 & 0.2) will be visible?

My thanks,

J. R. Madden (talk) 23:23, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Misinforming article title, historically innacurate!

Coffee came to Europe from Ethiopia. It originally passed to Yemen and from the 6th century up to the 16th century it was grown in these to countries only. Then to the Middle East and then to Turkey and then to Europe. Interestingly enough, the Catholic Cardinals initially forbid the drinking of coffee as a "devil's drink".

I have tasted Arabic, Cyprian, Greek and Turkish coffees. They all taste differently. I haven't tasted coffee from any other Balkan country other than Greece, but I'm pretty sure they taste differently as well. Arabic coffee has more "sweet" flavor (probably due to cardamom), Greek coffee is stronger and Turkish and Cyprian coffees fall somewhere in the middle, at least according to my taste. The preparation of the coffee has slight differences in many countries.

My point is that it is historically inaccurate to name that specific range of coffee drinks as "Turkish coffee" since it was firstly prepared that way (boiled and unfiltered) by the Arabs.

I would suggest to change the article title to Arabic Coffee and let Cyprian, Greek, Turkish coffees redirect to this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyperspaced (talk • contribs) 11:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Small edit: About those who claim the word coffee is Turkish, here's the truth: the word coffee (cafe in French, καφές in Greek/Cyrpian etc.) came from the turkish word kahve which came from the arabic word qahwa which came from the Ethiopian province of Kaffa where coffee was grown. From the etymology of the word, you can get a small glimpse of the historical truth.

Phrase in lead

It says it is a way of preparing coffee. Wouldn't it actually be the product that is the result of the preparation? CurlyPop88 (talk) 06:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffeesatzlesen#Lesen_im_Kaffeesatz

Is it possible to link directly to the German Wikipedia article? --> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffeesatzlesen#Lesen_im_Kaffeesatz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.82.176.102 (talk) 04:02, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Preparation guidelines

Adding preparation guidelines to the article in each of the different geographical areas would help readers who wish to learn how to prepare the drink as it is done in the various areas mentioned. For instance, how much cardamom is typically used in Lebanese preparation? How much coffee is used in Turkey vs Bulgaria? How fine is fine, when discussing the grind? Particle sizes or screen gauges could be used to accurately describe the fineness of the grind. Macadk (talk) 21:31, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like an interesting project, but there are two difficulties with it:

1. I suspect that local practices vary widely.
2. I doubt that there are any reliable sources documenting local practices accurately. Cookbooks reflect the authors' preferences, and can't be counted on as accurate documentation.

Sounds like you should get some research funding to travel around the region documenting practices (and their variation) and publish an article! --Macrakis (talk) 23:04, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Credit missing for text used under "Preparation"

I was struck by an interesting turn of phrase ("dissolve the flavoursome compounds") and googled it to see if it was perhaps 1911 Britannica or something. The phrase (along with a big chunk of text) appeared in two recent books on books.google, as well as on various websites. Did someone here write it, and have it lifted subsequently by the books and websites, or...? If it isn't original to here, some sort of citation and/or rewrite seems necessary. Jason Townsend (talk) 01:27, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Hafindjan?

I've been drinking Turkish coffee for over 30 years. I was introduced to it by my Serbian-born mother-in-law (she also spent significant periods in Bosnia, Croatia and Slovenia when they were all part of Yugoslavia). She always called the little pot with the long handle, what sounds like a "hafindjan", but I see no mention of this or anything like it in the article. Is this a recognised word, and how is it spelt? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 19:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

The little pot with the long handle is called cezve, and fincan(exact prounciation like findjan) means cup in Turkish. KazekageTR (talk) 11:10, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

small pot for making Turkish coffee nomenclature

My grandmother called the small pot with long handle for making Turkish coffee a "libriq". We are Sefardic (Hispanic) Jews, grandma was from Izmir, Turkey (Otttoman at the time of her arrival in America in 1903). At home in Pasadena, California, she mostly spoke Spanish, switching to Greek or Turkish only to keep secrets from my mother. For what it's worth, she always did the fortune telling as described in the Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.241.124.170 (talk) 11:33, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Biased ??

I read the article and it is mentioned as Turkish coffee everywhere in the article. I agree that according to recent advances (UNESCO heritage) Turks have some "rights" on the coffee. However, what I cannot understand is that the Turkish coffee is a matter of tradition in the Balkans, Arabs, Egypt, Lebanon etc. It is a common tradition and a result of "common" living, and is not something that the Turks brought and established everywhere.

Also, differences in the tradition, preparation exist among different "types" of Turkish coffee. This is not made clear in the article.

Another notable difference is that only in the case of Greece (and Greek coffee) a lot of information are missing. They wrongly mention that it was called Turkish coffee and then changed to Greek. Both terminologies used to exist and in particular, they refer to different tradition in preparation (minor differences) and in the flavor (this can be from mild to major difference). Moreover, there is a whole tradition around greek coffee (or Turkish coffee) in Greece. (For the other countries is it mentioned, but for Greece noting) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.162.253.253 (talk) 00:27, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Of course it's biased. What do you expect from an article called Turkish coffee. Unfiltered coffee is what it really is. --92slim (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Some extra information: Greek coffee is no longer very fashionable among Athenians. The Kafenion has been replaced by cafes. The traditional brew was first undermined by the Frappé, a chilled concoction that took Greece by storm in the late ’60s and ’70s and hasn't completely let go since. To make it, instant coffee, sugar and water are mixed together in a shaker or by hand until as frothy as meringue; the coffee is then poured into a tall glass and then ice and evaporated milk are added according to taste. By the ’80s, the Frappé was the number one coffee of choice in the Greek capital. In the ’90s, influenced by international trends, Greeks started drinking Espresso and Cappuccino. The last decade has seen Espresso Freddo (iced espresso) and Cappuccino Freddo (cappuccino with plenty of ice, topped with frothy cold milk), only found in Greece and the cafes of the Diaspora, overtaking the frappé as the cold coffees of choice, especially among younger Greeks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.187.116.251 (talk) 03:55, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

I agree with the above. And I would totally disagree with those references that "the name was changed for political reasons". This directly contradicts my own personal experience as someone who's grown up in Cyprus, and that of my parents and grandparents. There was no such thing as Turkish vs Greek vs Cypriot coffee. It was just 'coffee', and this is how people from that generation still refer to it. In the same way Italians don't call their national coffee "espresso", they just call it "coffee". No-one doubts that Cypriot coffee is "Turkish-style" coffee, but at the same time Cypriot coffee is a distinct variant; if you go to a coffee shop and ask for a traditional Cypriot vs traditional Turkish coffee, you will get two entirely different things (albeit both 'Turkish-style'), and this is also the case with 'Greek' coffee. Personally I prefer 'Cypriot' coffee to both 'Greek' or 'Turkish' coffee, (though 'Greek' is a closer variant than the 'Turkish' one, and all three are fairly similar in the first place).

Furthermore, in the context of Cyprus and Greek-Turkish relationships, I wouldn't trust those references to be factual at all. They are by British authors, and stem from an era of rampant british propaganda, when the UK was following a foreign policy of 'divide and conquer', attempting to strain Greek-Turkish relationships to justify its role as a Guarantor Force in the island to the UN. There are many british media clippings from the time which sound completely implausible and ridiculous today, if not overtly stereotyping and bigoted. The extent of this propaganda and the role the UK and US played in the creation of the 'Cyprus problem' is brilliantly explored in the book "The Cyprus Conspiracy" by Brendan O'Malley and Ian Craig, which investigates and discusses all now-declassified documents of the US and UK pertaining to their role in the Cyprus problem, within the historical and cultural context of that time. Therefore I would certainly be suspicious of the first reference since it seems to be explicitly written in that context. The second reference is actually visible through Google Books, and is misrepresented as factual by being taken out of context; in that text, it is but a footnote, representing the author's opinion, in that he finds the possibility of "Turkish coffee" being renamed to "Greek coffee" after the 1974 invasion intriguing (it is unclear whether this actually happened and to what extent, or if he has particular isolated press clippings of political character in mind), and goes on to speculate even further that had there been a 'proper' Greek name for 'coffee' they would have probably changed that too; this is purely speculative, it is not stating a fact, let alone presenting evidence for it. In fact, the main text to which this footnote is attached, seems to suggest the opposite: "There is a considerable amount of Turkish loan-words in Greek, such as [...] «καφές» ('coffee')."

Bosnian coffee ... missing sentence?

The section on Bosnian/Herzegovinan coffee says:

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, Turkish coffee is also called "Bosnian coffee" (Bosnian: bosanska kahva), which is made slightly differently from its Turkish counterpart. Another difference from the Turkish preparation is that when the water reaches its boiling point, a small amount is saved aside for later, usually in a coffee cup.

"Another" is out of place, because that's the first and only difference listed. Does anyone know what the person who wrote that actually meant to say? IAmNitpicking (talk) 11:00, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

I assume the first difference was the statement that the coffee "is made slightly differently from its Turkish counterpart". But, you might want to track down (in the Edit History) the person who added the paragraph and ask them directly. NewYorkActuary (talk) 13:46, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

A WP article on Turkish coffee that doesn't even tell you what Turkish coffee is − or how to make it?

I came here to find out. But, sadly, I went out of the same door as I came in,Ttocserp 10:14, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

This is not a howto or recipe site. You might want to consult Wikibooks Recipes

IAmNitpicking14:05, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@IAmNitpicking: Surely there is some middle ground between the current text, "Turkish coffee is a method of preparing unfiltered coffee," which says nothing about what the method actually is, and giving a recipe. Deli nk (talk) 14:16, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

The section "Europe" is off-topic

The section "Europe" is not about Turkish coffee, the specific product, but is simply a brief history of coffee (in genera)l in Europe. It should be removed to the WP article Coffee (if not there already). While the coffee-drinking habit did spread to Europe from the Ottoman empire, there is no suggestion (much less, any references cited in support) that by the time coffee was served in Venice or Oxford, it was Turkish coffee. Ttocserp 16:19, 20 July 2017 (UTC)