Talk:Maple syrup/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Old discussion

I disagree that the thing about Vermont was not NPOV - in fact, it was debunking the idea that Vermont is the premiere syrup producing site.

I welcome additions or clarifications about the entry I made on maple syrup grading, especially if knowledgable folks from Canada or elsewhere wish to contribute what they know about grading in their countries. --Neschek 17:20, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Vermont may not even be the largest producer in the US, as Vermont packers purchase large amounts of syrup in bulk from NY and other areas, thus inflating Vermont's "production." Pollinator 20:16, Jun 29, 2004 (UTC)

This statement is incorrect, but is a common misconception. While Vermont packers do purchase a great deal of maple syrup from other states and provinces for consumer packaging and resale, it is illegal to label any syrup sold not PRODUCED in Vermont as Vermont syrup. The production values reported is for syrup produced in Vermont. Other statistics are available that show the amount of syrup purchased by Vermont companies, packaged, and resold as non-Vermont syrup.

Dr. Tim Perkins, Proctor Maple Res Ctr., Univ of Vermont (March 2, 2006)

When was this regulation begun? I know that in past years (1950s and 1960s) Vermont bought a lot of NY syrup that was not identified as NY by label. Or was it done fraudulently? Pollinator 04:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

You have a source? Or is this a personal recollection?

---

"It takes approximately forty litres of sap to make one litre of maple syrup."

How much sap does the typical tree produce?

Here in New England, it varies enormously from tree to tree, and season to season, although 10 gallons (37 liters) is the standard number for a healthy, mature (at least 40 years old) sugar maple. Sap flow is produced by warm days, which expand the sap so it goes up the tree, and cold nights, which contracts it so it comes down. If the weather's wrong - cold days or warm nights in January-February (used to be early March, but climate change has altered that) - sap flow can be just a few liters per tree.

Hey, this is probably good stuff to put in the article, eh? - DavidWBrooks 12:39, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks --Carnildo 03:34, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I am unsure of the average quantity of sap produced by the maples here in Quebec, I however do know that the sugar content of the sap, as well as its quantity varies a lot with the weather (apparently, cold freezing nights and milder days consist of an ideal condition to produce good sap, so the length of the maple sugar season also depends on this factor). --66.11.179.30 19:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

No commercial links, please

I removed an external link to a site that sold maple trees. Largely irrelevant and commercial - DavidWBrooks 20:08, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Minor edit

In the Production section, I changed the first sentence to read "... New England and Quebec" (instead of "and New York".) It was misleading before: considering that Quebec produces (as noted farther down) four times more than all of the US, doesn't it merit a mention up there?

The full sentence read

Real maple syrup comes from Canada or the northern United States, especially New England and Quebec.

which implies that Quebec is part of the northern United States. I figured that it was just some random user trying to be silly. I've put the mention of Quebec back in. --Carnildo 22:06, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

About the "four times as much" comment... The stats quotes in the article tell us that Canada produces about three times as much syrup as the U.S. I changed that sentence to remove the contradiction. 24.60.232.93 03:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)gm

North American Indians?

I came to wikipedia hoping to read about the North American Indian connection with maple syrup -- either the pre-colonization history of maple syrup amongst native peoples or about the culture which nevertheless grew up around maple syrup. Except, there's absolutely nothing. Can anyone weigh in on this? -- 222.7.147.28 6 July 2005 16:59 (UTC)

From what I remember from school, amerindians would cut an incision and insert a small wooden peg from which the sap would dribble out. As for its use, it was use both as food stuff and medicinal (maple water is supposed to be laxative)--Marc pasquin 21:34, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

This is indeed an interesting part of the topic. Although some more research should be done before adding actual native related information in the article, I do remind information about it. In Quebec at least, natives used to produce maple syrup and to not depend on sugar cane. They would throw fire heated rocks into the sap to make it thicker. When colonization began, at a time where sugar cane was overly expensive, colonizers started to also discover maple sugar learning from the natives, and if I remember a catholic nun was mostly responsible for popularizing it in the newly developing communities in this region... More efficient means to produce usable sugar from maple sap were then developed. --66.11.179.30 19:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Some more historical info: Native American peoples (they do not call themselves "Amerindians") taught the European settlers how to make syrup. According to a legend I have heard from local Ojibwa people here in northern Minnesota, the trees originally produced thick syrup ready-made, but Coyote or Nanabush (both trickster figures), felt this made the people lazy, so he climbed to the tops of the trees and poured lots of water in. (Euwell Gibbons also mentioned this legend in his book, Stalking the Wild Asparagus, in the section on sugaring, although he does not name the tribe or the trickster. Gibbons was from the East Coast -- could be there are widespread different versions of the story.) Here in Minnesota the usual species used by the native people to make the wooden spiles was the staghorn sumac or scarlet sumac, both of which have pithy hollow stems which can be scraped out to make good tubes. Many Ojibwa and Anishanabe families around here still do sugaring, but use metal spiles nowadays. (I don't know of any doing it commercially. Mostly it is a family tradition for local use.) Also, many local people (including myself -- I'm not native but knowledgeable) tap boxelders, which are maples and grow much, much faster than sugar or black maples. The syrup was originally boiled down in tight birchbark baskets by throwing hot rocks in. I have this firsthand from local native elders who remember seeing their great-grandparents doing it. However, when the fur trade arrived with metal pots, people switched to using them almost exclusively. According to the Minnesota Historical Society living history folks at the Pine City Fur Post (Pine City, MN), metal pots were a woman's most popular item to trade for, precisely for this reason (and for cooking other things also). Rooster613 18:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)Rooster613

Yes, and in Canada they don't call themselves Natives Americans. I've have taken care of that issue in the article. From what I remember in school, it was the Iroquois that perfected the technique and initially taught it to Europeans. I'll see if I can find a text book reference. --Bentonia School (talk) 13:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Once again, I've reverted Native Americans to "native peoples" or "First Nations and Native Americans." The native peoples of Canada do not refer to themselves, and nor does the Canadian government refer to them as Native Americans. Of the tribes that fall into the category, they are the First Nations peoples.--Bentonia School (talk) 04:37, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Canadian product

For a product that is primarily developed and marketted in Canada, the article is far too U.S.-centric. –Hollow Wilerding 02:29, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Any number of Americans would disagree with the basis for your statement, although maybe not the conclusion. Rmhermen 16:35, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

"Real maple syrup comes from Canada, particularly Quebec, and the northern United States, especially New England and northern New York State." " Does it always, is it made elsewhere, are there any countries where production, as opposed to importation, is illegal?

Why would it be illegal? It's not like it's crack or something...

"However, it can be made wherever maples grow." Well is it?"

"US labeling laws prohibit these products from being labeled "Maple Syrup", many simply calling the imitation, "Pancake Syrup". Do labeling laws in (some) other countries also prohibit this? I believe they do here in Australia. I know that it is legal to *import* it into Australia, I'm not sure whether or not Australian law allows *production* of it.

Myrtone@Maple syrup.com.au

Maple syrup is made in the U.S. as far south as Virginia and as far west as Michigan and Wisconsin -probably farther. But it looks like it is a North American product. Rmhermen 03:05, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

At least as far as Minnesota.[1] And "Fourteen northern states and four Canadian provinces produce maple sugar and maple syrup". Rmhermen 03:08, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

U.S. production appears to account for one-tenth of U.S. consumption with the remainder made up by importing the large majority of Canada's total production. However, Canadian per capita consumption appears to be about twice that of the U.S. These are rough figures involving data from two governments and some approximations. Rmhermen 05:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Maple syrup, can, in theory, be made wherever Maple Trees grow. However, collection of the sap is limited to areas with the right weather conditions. Sap cannot flow to be collected without the proper changes in temperature. The sap runs only when the temperature changes often between freezing and warm, so the sap is caught while it is running up and down the tree. Also, one buds form on the tree, it completely changes the taste of the syrup, making it bitter and undesirable. Basicly, it might be possible to make Maple Syrup on other continents, but the weather conditions may make for a very short season, if one is possible at all. --Balrog30 04:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I would imagine it would be possible in Russia and parts of Scandinavia too, though I have no knowledge of it being made there. 65.167.146.130 (talk) 20:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Could the pics be moved to Commons?

Hi, would be good if the pics could be moved to Wikipedia Commons, as they could then be used for other language versions of the article, like the Norwegian one. Ulflarsen 14:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

vermont comment

Regarding the passage: "Maple syrup is sometimes boiled down further to make maple sugar, a hard candy usually sold in pressed blocks, and maple toffee (similar to taffy) which may be poured on snow to harden it for eating." - I am from Vermont and my family has produced maple syrup for about 30 years and I have never heard it referred to as "maple toffee." We refer to it, perhaps colloquially, as "sugar on snow." (18:08, 26 April 2006 - 134.174.140.88)

Clicking on the "maple toffee" link and you'll see in the article that the term appears to be prevalent in Quebec. I'll add the "sugar on snow" which I have heard in NH as well. - DavidWBrooks 22:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

disease

i heard somewhere that if u ate maple syrup you could get th Maple Syrup disease. Myth or true? --Shandris 15:15, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Myth. There's no such thing. --Carnildo 06:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

So this is unrelated: Maple syrup urine disease? Shandris^{the azylean} 08:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

"Characterized by the urine having an odor similar to that of maple syrup." - not caused by maple syrup. - DavidWBrooks 11:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Unrelated, that is a genetic disease. 65.167.146.130 (talk) 20:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

grades

I wanted to find out what the 'Grade C' means that my bio organic maple syrup boasts, but it's not mentioned in the article. According to one explanation ([2]) C is now not an official grade anymore and is = B. On the other hand, here ([3]) they say that grade C is such low quality that it may not be sold to consumers but is used for e.g. flavouring tobacco. What is the truth? - Logologics 20:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I grew up on a farm producing maple syrup. I am almost 50 and have never heard of grade C. But we produced for the table market more than anything. The closest I can think of is a grade called commercial. Both the USDA and the Vermont Department of Agriculture include that grade which is used in all manner of products from baked beans to distilled spirits. I had not heard of the tobacco flavoring use. A Google search for Grade C Maple Syrup akes you to a Wisconsin producer, who mentions Grade C and describes it as "The end of the season brings mostly Grade B, which was formerly known as Grade C, with even more minerals and the strongest maple flavor.:

see link:http://www.mastercleanser.com/master-cleanser-2.htm

As this is not the site of a maple production regulatory organization it might all be myth. Not sure. CApitol3

I am a Canadian Maple Syrup Producer. While I don't have all the facts on Grade C, I do know that it is a part of an American grading system. I am fairly certain it is based out of vermont, but I don't have my reference material in front of me to be able to confirm that at just this moment. I do however know that it is an equivalent to Canada No. 3 Dark, which is a commercial grade. The Grading System has nothing to do with Quality whatsoever, but is rather a representation of the strength of the maple flavour. Later in the season, the flavour becomes stronger. Grade C would be the last run of the season. Most producers do not sell this grade to the public, but rather sell it wholesale to bakeries, or for other commercial uses. As a family-operated business, though, my family carries it in our store due to the popularity of the previously linked Master Cleanser fast. It is also popular as a cooking grade, as the stronger flavour comes through better when used with other stronger flavoured ingredients. Hope that clears up any questions. --Balrog30 04:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I've been meaning to add something about this for the article. The grading system is based primarily on color, with the lightest-colored syrups getting a higher grade. This actually negatively correlates with strength of flavor. Some sources (eg, Cook's Illustrated) recommend grade B maple syrup over grade A for its intensity of flavor, not just in cooking and baking, but for everyday use. I'm not sure about grade C – I've never seen that on the market. Peter G Werner 20:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

What kind of sugar?

Is it primarily fructose? Sucrose? What? —Ben FrantzDale 00:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Mostly sucrose. There really needs to be a section on the contents and chemistry of maple syrup. Peter G Werner 02:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Energy Use

Sugaring off obviously takes a lot of energy. This article should say exactly how much. Here's a back-of-the-napkin calculation:

• We have to boil off 39 gallons of sap to leave 1 gallon of syrup.
• Sap is mostly water at 540 cal/g.
• That gives 333 MJ.
• Gasoline is 34.6e6 MJ/L.
• That gives 2.5 gallons of gas per gallon of syrup.

That's obviously a lower bound; it doesn't include the inefficiency of heating or the energy to bring the water up to boiling temperature, but it's a start. If you have a better number, please add it. —Ben FrantzDale 02:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

This assumes that the water is all removed by boiling. But as the article says, some producers are now removing 75-80% of the water by reverse osmosis which requires only enough energy to operate the compressor. Would this reduce the total energy requirement by a factor of 3 or 4?

Dirac66 03:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I assume reverse osmosis would reduce this. I'd like to know that number too, but the sugar house I visited recently did it the old-fashioned way and apparently produces a few hundred gallons of syrup a day that way. —Ben FrantzDale 04:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Litres into Gallons

I am so not metric-skilled I do not dare correct this, but I'm pretty sure 40 litres does not equal 10 gallons. Would someone else please correct this? Tack. Mothperson cocoon 01:18, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

37.9 litres equals 10 U.S. gallons - 40 is close enough. There is also an imperial gallon used in Britain; perhaps you're thinking of that? - DavidWBrooks 01:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay. Never mind. Thanks. Mothperson cocoon 01:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

There are some more imperial to metric conversion issues. For example, 5/16th inch (tap hole diameter) is indeed 7.94 mm, but why not make it 8 mm? Also it seems that something went awry with the conversion from specific gravity to density in kg/m^3: 32 kg/m^3 is a ludicrously low density for any kind of syrup. Maybe it means 1032kg/m^3? 62.31.163.73 (talk) 22:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Origins

The user Richardphythian has edited the story to state that maple syrup originated in Japan. While Japan imports maple syrup, and has forests of maple, their varieties of maple including Acer palmatum, A. japonicum, A. pseudosieboldianum, A. shirasawanum, and A. sieboldianum, none produce sap able to be made into syrup. Google searches turn up nothng on Japanese production of maple syrup. Perhaps this is vandalism. CApitol3 13:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Is any syrup produced outside N. America?

Anyone know? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.110.221.182 (talk) 01:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

I was told by a park ranger in northern Indiana at a Maple Syrup Festival that only maples in North America store sugar in their sap and release it "upwards" in the spring under certain conditions (nights below freezing and 40 degree days). Sugar Maples transplanted to Europe in an attempt to start an industry over there did not behave in the same manner. Didn't make a whole lot of sense to me but maybe someone else knows about the "whys" of that. Perhaps I will do some research. Oldfart 13:15, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Where in Europe? It is a pretty big place you know, that is like saying 'Pine trees were transplanted to the Southern Hemisphere, but did not survive very well' Ghhyrd —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghhyrd (talk • contribs) 19:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

After a very small amount of googling, the only information I can find are various statements suggesting that the weather in Europe is not conducive to the sap rising and falling. This bodes ill for the maple syrup industry since that means AGW will possibly destroy the source of maple syrup. I also ran across a misstatement in a vermont report that state that Sugar Maples only grow and produce sap at altitudes above 2300 ft. Maybe that is true only in Vermont but I did my own maple syrup in Indiana on my own 4 or 5 maple trees at an altitude of 800-850 feet. (Indiana is somewhat FLATTENed by the glaciers....) Oldfart 13:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

After a quick search, the only source I was able to find for the 2300' figure was a website from Virginia Polytech--and I can easily believe that in Virginia it might only be possible to make syrup from trees growing at a fairly high elevation. In Vermont, any sugar maple at any elevation will produce useful sap. Is it possible that you saw the "vt.edu" domain and mistook it for a Vermont site?65.213.77.129 (talk) 12:50, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

External links

They seem heavily focussed on American maple syrup (particularly Vermont's, though that may "normal" within that context, that is, Vermont produces most of the American syrup). Shouldn't there be more Canadian/Quebec representation in there (because Canada, particularly Quebec, by itself, is the biggest producer of maple syrup)?--Boffob 03:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

This hasn't been corrected. The bias for Vermont seems pretty heavy handed, in fact. As if someone felt it wasn't Vermonty enough and decided to edit some bias into the text. Spottacus 22:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

The solutions, of course, are to add useful links for non-American sources, and to write good material on non-Vermont maple syrup. We eagerly anticipate these additions. - DavidWBrooks 23:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Chemistry

What are the various organic compounds that create maple syrup's flavor components (such as its "buttery" taste)? This should be addressed in the "Chemistry" section. Badagnani 18:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Xylem vs. phloem

I've heard that it used to be thought that it was phloem that contained the maple syrup. It would make sense, as phloem is usually associated with carrying sugars. If this (erroneous) belief was once thought to be true, perhaps we should mention it. --M1ss1ontomars2k4 04:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Mycologists to the rescue

There is some unidentifiable substance in my maple syrup. It looks a bit like mold, being a light, somewhat slimy, soft "blob". It is rather delicate, not to dissimilar to the latte foam remains when you drink down a cup of cappuccino too quickly. Now, with my biology training I think it is just possible, but a) maple syrup is a very hostile environment even for molds and b) I took a taste sample of the stuff and it did not have the typical moldy taste (it did not have a taste of its own and the syrup being Canadian Medium grade B should also not overpower any moldy taste if you know what you're looking for). I had been keeping the stuff in a closed and effectively airtight container in the fridge for some months; perhaps it is a chemical reaction instead which causes minerals or secondary compounds to precipitate. If not, I would certainly love to know what hardy fungus manages to grow in maple syrup... Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 08:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

In my experience and that of other I've spoken do, maple syrup will "grow" a solid-ish mold-like substance if not refrigerated. This may be strained out and it does not seem to affect the flavor. It doesn't seem to grow if the syrup is kept refrigerated, and even in syrup from which such a growth is strained. I can't swear it's a growth and not some kind of precipitate, but it certainly looks like one. --Ericjs (talk) 21:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Usage of 'North American Maple Syrup Producers Manual' as a source in this article.

The 'manual' has been used as a source for over 20 citations (#s 10, 18, 25, 26, 27, 48, 49, 52, and 82). They all link to the following site (https://web.archive.org/web/20160924094635/http://estore.osu-extension.org/cw_Search.aspx?k=maple), except for # 49 which I just added today. The one I added is a full online PDF version (https://holmes.osu.edu/sites/holmes/files/imce/Program_Pages/Maple/North American Maple Syrup Producers Manual full pdf.pdf) from Ohio State University (osu). In the next few days, I plan on updating all of them to point to the PDF version. Absolutely Certainly (talk) 23:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Merge dupe refs

Hello @Absolutely Certainly: The duplicate <ref>s do need to be merged the way @Nikkimaria did or in some similar way. I don't know about the other changes. Invasive Spices (talk) 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Moved from my Talk:

Hi Invasive Species,

To which duplicate references are you referring? Citations 5, 7, 9, and 14 are about 4 different species of maple trees, as are citations 6, 8, 10, and 15 (with pictures). Absolutely Certainly (talk) 21:13, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

@Absolutely Certainly: There were multiple duplicate references that should have all been Grandtner2005. I think Nikkimaria has done all of these.[4] This is explained WP:DUPCITES. — Invasive Spices (talk) 18 September 2022 (UTC)

@Absolutely Certainly: You have now removed these repeated references. What is your rationale for doing this? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:11, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely Certainly I don't think you understand DUPCITES. They should not be removed. The <ref> should be reused with /. You can see that Nikkimaria did that <ref name="Grandtner2005"/>. Invasive Spices (talk) 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Moved again from my talk. Invasive Spices (talk) 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. You provided an explanation backed with a reference that confirms your explanation. I will pass on trying to improve this article as their is too much opposition. But if I did, an example of a major change I would do is change the first paragraph of the lead from:

Maple syrup is a syrup made from the xylem sap of sugar maple, black maple or red maple trees, although it can also be made from other maple species. In cold climates, these trees store starch in their trunks and roots before winter; the starch is then converted to sugar that rises in the sap in late winter and early spring. Maple trees are tapped by drilling holes into their trunks and collecting the sap, which is processed by heating to evaporate much of the water, leaving the concentrated syrup.

To:

Maple syrup is made from the sap of maple trees. The sap is collected by drilling small holes into the trunks of a maple trees. inserting small pipes in the holes, which allow the sap to flow into containers placed below the pipes. The collected sap is then boiled down to produce maple syrup. Mainly produced in Eastern Canada and Northern New England, Quebec is notable as it produces 70% of the total worldwide supply.

Short, sweet. Avoids all the specific information that is explained in the body of the article. Absolutely Certainly (talk) 22:25, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

WOW! Absolutely Certainly (talk) 15:04, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Grading

The third paragraph of the lead is contradicted by the information in the section /* Grades */ Absolutely Certainly (talk) 22:36, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Maple syrup in abolution use

There is disagreement whether to include a sentence about an abolitionist named Lucretia Mott who, as part of avoiding any slave-made products such as sugar cane, distributed maple-flavored candies with the tag "“Take this, my friend, you need not fear to eat. No slave hath toiled to cultivate this sweet.” It is discussed in a Nation magazine profile of her work. I think this is an interesting and insightful item but another editor feels it's not of sufficient importance for this article, since the use of maple by abolitionists is already mentioned. After bouncing back and forth, does anybody else have an opinion? - DavidWBrooks (talk) 16:14, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I say: include it. It's a factoid that makes clear the relevancy of maple syrup to the abolitionist issue, rather than only a bald statement to that effect.Smallchief (talk) 18:44, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

It cannot do so, because it is not about maple syrup at all - it's about maple sugar. It may be relevant to that article assuming it is accurate - there seems to be some disagreement on details in sources, and the source in use here is not one that seems reliable for historical studies - but not here, even leaving aside issues of due weight. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

The previous sentence in the article mentions maple sugar. However, that is a good point - Mott wasn't handing out containers of maple syrup. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Agree .....should move info to Maple sugar. Moxy- 14:25, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

I have no objection to that. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Done. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:05, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Citation maintenance notice regarding short footnotes

In order to maintain consistency in articles using a particular short footnote style, a notice was placed at the beginning of this talk page which appears to fit the style being used for this article. The intention is to be an aid to contributors and citation maintenance editors in upgrading citations to the highest Wikipedia standards. It is often unclear what the rationale is for sfn and harvnb use due to the mixture with inline ref citations which inevitably occurs due to contributors being unfamiliar with short footnotes. However the notice may incorrectly style for this article, and that the actual rule is different. For example- that sources always are placed in the cited works section if they are notable, regardless if they have different pages referenced or not. If some other rule is being used, please add a note here and I will place the correct notice here. J JMesserly (talk) 22:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're suggesting here - notability has nothing to do with where a source is cited. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

User:Nikkimaria, thank you for responding. I gather that my guess is that the style notice I added to the top of this talk page correctly describes the style of short footnote use in this article? It does not state the rationale has anything to do with notability as you can see. (See highlighted section). If this particular notice does not correctly describe the rationale used, then may I ask what rule editors should use when deciding when to use ref versus sfns?

To answer your query though, some articles have different criteria for what sources are and are not included in the sorted sources list- it is up to the contributors and there are no guidelines regarding which styles are preferred or discouraged other than that they be consistent. For example the goal could be to create a sorted list of notable cited works, with less notable citations left inline. J JMesserly (talk) 00:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)