Talk:Pizza effect

DonBeroni constantly removes references to the concept behind "pizza effect" being historically incorrect. How to stop them?

It is clear that Agehananda Bharati had only vague ideas about the history of pizza. For example the WikiPedia page about the history of pizza states (with sources!) that by early 1800s there were over 50 pizzeria in Naples selling different styles of pizza. That doesn't change the point of the Pizza Effect as a concept, but it should be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gotofritz (talk • contribs) 13:28, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

This page is full of people's musings

There are many entries where people have just added what they think are examples of "pizza effect", but they are not quoting any sources for that belief, it's just them musing. For example

The founders of the Theosophical Society, Helena Blavatsky and Henry Steel Olcott, were influenced by Eastern religions, then placed their headquarters in Adyar, Chennai, from where they spread their views within India.[3]

The source doesn't mention the pizza effect. Same for the one starting with "According to scholar Kim Knott, Mahatma Gandhi 'was not very interested in religion..." or "The Day of the Dead parade in Mexico City was inspired by an event in the James Bond film Spectre, which was fictional when the film was produced.[10] " or... most of them in fact.

Salsa Music

New World musical styles that derive from West and Central African roots following the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, such as salsa, rumba, samba, and merengue, were imported back into Africa, especially in Angola and the Congos, thanks to continual influences from Brazil thanks to the shared Portuguese colonial history of Angola and Brazil, and modern influences from Cuba due to the presence of Cuban communists in Central Africa to assist revolutionary movements there. Is this an example of pizza effect? --222.80.175.19 (talk) 07:59, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Who coined the phrase pizza effect?

The article is a bit unclear. I understand it as Agehananda Bharati not coining the actual term pizza effect, but only some other related term - not sure if I understood it correct. The text should be more clear. --Strandråg (talk) 10:27, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Bullshit in the first place

This "pizza effect" tries to explains something starting from a story that is false in the first place. Pizza in its traditional shape and ingredients has a much longer history than the italian immigration in US which begun around 1870. Dumas father wrote about it in 1843 and there are many evidences of existing pizzerias at least back in 1830. I'm confused.

References

The source used by the article is also not reliable at all, and the idea of one author on the argument is clearly not enough to publish for such a controversial claim on wikipedia as true. Since it is not only false, according to many other sources, but also clearly controversial the first paragraph regarding "pizza" should definitely be changed.

Yuiolop (talk) 13:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand the "pizza effect". No-one claims that pizza itself was invented by Italian immigrants to the U.S. but back in Italy (and when Dumas père wrote about it), pizza was more of a general type of food with no firmly set fillings and there was no great enthusiasm about it. Only after the immigrants started selling pizza in other countries and the locals became excited about it, there arose a need to codify the pizza somehow. If the pizza toppings (and ways of making the pizza) would have been mostly random like back in Italy, the customers would have been disappointed when one pizza tasted wholly different than the other. In addition, to further increase the pizza sales, it was necessary to concoct stories that only very specific, high-quality ingredients were allowed in "real pizza", that different pizzas had catchy "trade names" and that it had to be made in a very specific way.

Almost all of the classic restaurant dishes come from peasant cooking and are originally hodgepodge-style dishes in which you just throw random stuff into your pot and boil it for several hours (or put that random stuff in some sort of pie and bake it). So, when the word arrived back in Italy that pizza was popular in other countries, the Italians naturally embraced the aspects that had made pizza so popular abroad. That's how almost all of the "national cuisines" were born. The traditional cooking in every European country is more or less the aforementioned hodgepodge. Those hodgepodges became national dishes when people decided that their hodgepodge could only be made from these and those ingredients, while their neighbours used those and these ingredients.

The Dumas père excerpt that you posted really just illustrates that fact. He lists great many ingredients and tells us that the type of pizza currently being made depends on how good the olive harvest is or how abundant is the fishermen's catch, i.e. it has no set ingredients. He even thinks it is similar to a French dish talmouse, indicating that the pizza has not yet it's own identity. Furthermore, he tells that lazzaroni (working-class Neapolitans) only eat pizza during the winter, yet again demonstrating that it is not a specific revered delicacy but something made out of necessity. JJohannes (talk) 00:52, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Most of the examples in the article are specious. The 'pizza effect' is entirely contradicted by the main pizza article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizza). Italian and American pizzas still use very different ingredients. Corned beef and cabbage is not a dish served in Ireland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denniskenny (talk • contribs) 00:32, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I agree that the whole premise behind the term "pizza effect" is idiotic to anyone who has any knowledge of the history of pizza. Or simply just read the wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_pizza. As well as being rather thrashy. In brief, pizza took form in Naples and not Sicily, and not thanks to returning "kinsfolk" from the US, US influences on Italian pizzas are nonexistant. However, people do use the term 'pizza effect', and Wikipedia's job is to describe what people use, not what people should use. I have added a note in the main article pointing out that it is Gotofritz (talk) 02:04, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Kudos

Jim Douglas, familiar with Bharati's thesis, applied it to black blues originating in the United States before 1960. The music of Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters, etc. went over to England, where it was embraced by other musicians (especially white men playing electric guitar). Then, this re-packaged blues came back to the US presented by the Rolling Stones, Cream, Led Zeppelin, etc. in the late 1960s where it was embraced by baby boomers (who had never heard of Robert Johnson, etc.). Later, some of these American baby boomers discovered the roots of the British blues-rock in the recordings of the original American blues artists.

To the person who wrote this, you’re seriously awesome. This was the first thing I thought of when I saw the article on hacker news, and I came here to look for it. Thanks! Viriditas (talk) 08:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Recent reverts

@Gotofritz:, I understand you wish to include an assertion in this page that Bharati's assertions about the history of pizza are incorrect. However, I will remind you that Wikipedia has never and will never be a place to right great wrongs. The edit you made on 21 November cites only two sources, both of which were simply copied from the history of pizza article, and are likewise wholly inappropriate. The first source is an 1843 travel book by Alexandre Dumas, and the second is a 2007 research paper for a "food technology" exam at an obscure Italian university. An 1843 first-hand book which makes no claim of objectivity or empiric accuracy is simply not a reliable source for the content you wish to include in the article, and neither source mentions or disputes Bharati's claim (that pizza was invented in its modern form in the US). If you wish to add the content back into the article, you must first find reliable sources which specifically mention Bharati's claim and counter its assertion, and then unless the sources you find overwhelmingly disagree with his claim, phrase it in a way that does not imply that Bharati is completely in the wrong. Regards, DonBeroni (talk) 23:10, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

@DonBeroni you are just being unnecessary petulant.

> The edit you made on 21 November cites only two sources...

Two sources is more than enough. It's more than the vast majority of the articles here.

> The first source is an 1843 travel book by Alexandre Dumas

...which is perfect since it is an historical source of the time

> the second is a 2007 research paper for a "food technology" exam at an obscure Italian university

Typical US-centric bias. Italian universities are only "obscure" to you. Given that this is the country where pizza was invented, it is in fact more relevant than any knowledge you may offer.

> If you wish to add the content back into the article, you must first find reliable sources

You don't get to decide, buddy.

> phrase it in a way that does not imply that Bharati is completely in the wrong

Bharati IS completely wrong. You are not

I am restoring again, and will continue to do so. Gotofritz (talk) 13:35, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

This screed doesn't actually address any of the points I raised. Also, you shouldn't push your edits before the talk page discussion has concluded, although I don't know why I'm wasting my breath speaking to you. DonBeroni (talk) 13:42, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

It addresses all the point, you simply refuse to accept it because you are petulant, petty individual.

I have raised an dispute resolution request https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Pizza_effect Gotofritz (talk) 13:50, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

I agree with @DonBeroni completely here. The paragraph in question appears to be original research. If @Gotofritz wishes to refute Bharati’s claims they should either cite an academic source that makes such claims or otherwise write a paper and submit it to academic review, then they may cite the opinions presented in the paper. Do not edit war your original opinions. Mozzd (talk) 19:47, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

This is nonsense, it wasn't "original research", it was someone stating an opinion as fact with no sources whatsoever. Gotofritz (talk) 18:39, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Please reference WP:SYNTH Mozzd (talk) 21:57, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

You are hiding WP:SYNTH when it absolutely doesn't apply. To require that anyone who wants to make an edit to Wikipedia needs to submit a research paper goes against the whole point of Wikipedia. There is already plenty of research on the topic, and I linked to some. It was OP who did no research whatsoever and just stated the (wrong) opinion as fact. Gotofritz (talk) 11:09, 30 May 2026 (UTC)