This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Caffeine article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Caffeine is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 16, 2006. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Toolbox |
---|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Caffeine isn't a "mild cognitive nootropic" the wikipedia nootropic page classifieds it as a nootropic wrong information saying that it's a "mild one" James.Pater (talk) 22:43, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello Wikipedia Community,
I am writing to propose an update to the "Caffeine" article. Specifically, the current citation number 243 ("Some Common Questions". Eagle Energy. Retrieved 22 May 2017), which is permanently dead and no longer provides valuable information to the article's readers, with my own recently published article titled "Caffeine Inhalers: An In-Depth Look at Use, Effects, and Regulation," which can be found at the following URL: https://thegoldenlamb.com/coffee-science/caffeine-inhalers/.
This report not only provides a high level of detail on caffeine inhalers but also has been structured and written to meet the standards of reliable sources as defined by Wikipedia's guidelines.
Therefore, I propose that this article can be a suitable replacement for the dead link, thus improving the quality of the information provided on the "Caffeine" Wikipedia page.
I kindly request that a member of the Wikipedia community who has the ability to edit the page reviews this proposal and, if found suitable, replaces the current citation number 243 with the following:
"Caffeine Inhalers: An In-Depth Look at Use, Effects, and Regulation". The Golden Lamb. Retrieved 29 July 2023.
Please feel free to contact me if there are any questions or further clarifications needed regarding this request. Thank you for your consideration.
Best regards,
Kelsey HappyFhantum (talk) 02:36, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Not done - your blog would not qualify as a WP:RS source; WP:PROMO violation and WP:NOTBLOG. Also, misuse of bold in your message. Zefr (talk) 04:44, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Error in table under Products, last line 'Coffee-flavored milk drink': the value in the mg/L column reads 660-3290, should read 66-354 according to the cited source. Also, although the caffeine per serving values agree with the cited reference, the stated serving size of 250 ml does not match the citation. 80.216.216.86 (talk) 21:04, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
The mean (±SD) caffeine concentration was 1930 ± 90 mg/L, the median was 1745 mg/L and values ranged from 660 to 3290 mg/L.--WikiLinuz {talk} 21:13, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the last paragraph of the introduction it says "A cup of coffee contains 80–175 mg of caffeine, depending on what "bean" (seed) is used, how it is roasted (darker roasts have less caffeine), and how it is prepared (e.g., drip, percolation, or espresso)." and cites here [1].
The claim that darker roasts have less caffeine isn't supported by the article, which agrees that the numbers are not statistically significant.
I suggest that this should either be reworded to reflect this, use a different citation, or be removed altogether.
Additionally, and I know this isn't a source, but I was a barista and learned a lot about coffee, I know that this isn't true - the type of bean matters way more than the roast for caffeine content. Padrillium (talk) 14:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
@Zefr I am seeking other references about this death and I am thinking about a re-write of what I posted. I purposely avoided mentioning the origin of the drink and the law suit to avoid my post looking like news. Additionally, I argue my post does not fit squarely into any of the four categories listed in WP:NOTNEWS. While it might be difficult to find a case study on this event, my purpose was to draw attention to the additive effects of other chemicals and/or preexisting conditions that might lower the amount of caffeine necessary to cause heart damage or death, and therefore I used a reference that I could find. Using this specific event in this context does seem like a good example of additive effects. Lastly, I would like to communicate that point without casting a shadow on energy drinks in general. You might know there continues to be debate about the health effects of "energy" drinks. If you have any ideas or references I would be glad to follow up. I have searched PubMed and the CDC so far and found it will take more research to find a non-newsy reference. Perhaps a good re-write and the use of multiple references, including some from peer-reviewed research, might work better. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jstengel (talk • contribs) 05:54, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
The first picture of the structure does not include the 3 “CH3” groups in the molecule 149.88.21.138 (talk) 12:02, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
All sources mentioned physical dependence. It was not specified that physical caffeine dependence is classified as “low-moderate” in the DSM-5, specifically “Functional Consequences of Caffeine Withdrawal.” “Caffeine Withdrawal Disorder” was rated as Moderate 13% and I modified it and it was removed after a short period Frome page. Yungocdy (talk) 22:26, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
It's a locked article so I can't edit it myself, but one of the sources in the caffeine article is wrong, specifically citation 24. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine "Caffeine is the world's most widely consumed psychoactive drug.[23][24]" It does not say anywhere in the paper that it's the most widely consumed psychoactive drug.
An alternative source that actually makes that claim can be eg. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3680974/
Link to the faulty paper in question https://academic.oup.com/jsh/article-abstract/35/2/269/965314?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false (edited) 82.147.167.3 (talk) 23:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC) Done GrayStorm (talk) 01:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 March 2024 and 4 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kph7917 (article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Kph7917 (talk) 22:17, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
"A systematic review and meta-analysis from 2014 found that concurrent caffeine and l-theanine use has synergistic psychoactive effects that promote alertness, attention, and task switching; these effects are most pronounced during the first hour post-dose." 1.This point's reference #56 is from a research article paid for by Glaxosmithkline using Glaxosmithkline employees. Glaxosmithkline produces products with L-theanine and caffeine Which is a conflict interest. 2.Does not establish how L-theanine adds any benefit when it lists things caffeine is already associated with by itself. You can see an example of one of Glaxo's products here with caffeine and L-theanine. https://www.amazon.com/Replenish-Excedrin-Electrolytes-L-Theanine-Caffeine/dp/B0BN71G5CD?ref_=ast_sto_dp&th=1&psc=1 2601:8C:4E80:7578:1DD5:595D:5CFB:52AB (talk) 10:08, 3 June 2024 (UTC)