![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Sogan-dolma page were merged into Dolma on April 2018 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
So,this article is about a Bosnian (in reality - Herzegovinian) dish, belonging to the Bosnian national cuisine! Yes, that dish has a Turkish name. So what!? Ottoman Turkish language had been widely used in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the past. Do not be so sure this dish has a Turkish origin just because it has a Turkish name! And even if it did come from Turkey - so what!? In Bosnia it looks how it doe's look now. In Bosnia! Maybe it has been changed, although it still bears the same name? It might also have been born in Bosnia (or somewhere else) and then adopted in the Turkish national cuisine (and others) too. So what!? The squash itself came from America! It might have been changed ih your country, too. So, that dish that you know as it is, that dish belongs to your national cuisine. You wouldn't like to have in your national cuisine category some dishes that are not really yours, wouldn't you? If you find that it's exactly the same dish that exists in your national cuisine too - fine; that would mean it's your national dish too. But, if you find it's not exactly the same dish - leave it alone! That would mean it's not your dish and do not try to grab it!
Modern Turks certainly know the Turkish language. The modern Turkish. But, many modern Turks do not know many old words belonging to Ottoman Turkish and many such words have been preserved in Bosnia (and Herzegovina :) ). You are probably right if you say "dolma" comes from "dolmak" and means "stuffed", but... you see, in Mostar, the city where it is the local very speciality, they call those single onion layers "dolme" (sing. "dolma"), meaning, in that case, obviously, "shirts" (or "robes", if you prefer), obviously from Ottoman "dolaman" (that in those regions had been "dolama").
An user that wanders why he/she should have an user name wanders also
why this is a separate page and wanders if we then should also have articles for patlıcan (egg-plant) biber (pepper) and other dolma types. Off course we should!!! If the basic ingredients are different, the dishes are different! "Dolma" is a type, the group they belong to, and that page certainly should stay. But, there're categories like
"Cabbage dishes",
"Onion-based foods" and so on (as well as the categories treating the horticultural crops), you can't just put the same generic "Dolma" all there around!
Somebody found the links provided in this page were "low-quality", without an explanation why they are "low-quality", let alone any notice about who is to decide which links are "quality" and which aren't (and under what criteria). Obviously, he or she didn't bother to provide any links, let alone "quality" ones; he or she just found himself/herself entitled to cancel what he or she didn't like. And I find perfectly right to restore them!
Kornjaca ( talk) 00:04, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Dear Kornjaca, you are taking very aggressive positions in your edits and your comments above. I'd like to remind you that Wikipedia editing is a collaborative process, and the article doesn't "belong" to any editor or country.
For this edit, your edit summary is "this edit was pure vandalism, arrogant and chauvinistic". I'm sorry you interpret it this way; I certainly didn't intend it that way and recommend that in the future you assume good faith.
As for the substance of the edits:
As for your edits:
Best, -- Macrakis ( talk) 09:56, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I've seen you've removed everything referring to Turkish stuff (I'm not a Turk), so I assumed such motivation. Im glad if I was wrong and I apologise. Actually I can agree that this is not an article about the word or phrase, but about the dish. I didn't add that category, but it doesn't disturb me if it's there. So, I've restored it along with all the others. It's not about the article, it's about the category. If there is such category, then it would be normal that this article too belong there. Yes, I do find a bit strange that such category exists and I struggle to see any sense. But, as we see - it is here (until some admin decide to cancel it). So... However, I won't undo your last edit and I will stay apart for that matter.
Kornjaca ( talk) 00:28, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Wow what is going on here. I believe you don't get to dictate what to do in Wikipedia so your mood is very questionable and looks uncooperative. Macrakis summarized my thoughts btw, he is right as hell. kazekagetr 22:16, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
The first line of the article clearly says what is it about. Yes, Macrakis gave a reasonable comment.
Kornjaca (
talk)
00:28, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Sogan-dolma page were merged into Dolma on April 2018 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
So,this article is about a Bosnian (in reality - Herzegovinian) dish, belonging to the Bosnian national cuisine! Yes, that dish has a Turkish name. So what!? Ottoman Turkish language had been widely used in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the past. Do not be so sure this dish has a Turkish origin just because it has a Turkish name! And even if it did come from Turkey - so what!? In Bosnia it looks how it doe's look now. In Bosnia! Maybe it has been changed, although it still bears the same name? It might also have been born in Bosnia (or somewhere else) and then adopted in the Turkish national cuisine (and others) too. So what!? The squash itself came from America! It might have been changed ih your country, too. So, that dish that you know as it is, that dish belongs to your national cuisine. You wouldn't like to have in your national cuisine category some dishes that are not really yours, wouldn't you? If you find that it's exactly the same dish that exists in your national cuisine too - fine; that would mean it's your national dish too. But, if you find it's not exactly the same dish - leave it alone! That would mean it's not your dish and do not try to grab it!
Modern Turks certainly know the Turkish language. The modern Turkish. But, many modern Turks do not know many old words belonging to Ottoman Turkish and many such words have been preserved in Bosnia (and Herzegovina :) ). You are probably right if you say "dolma" comes from "dolmak" and means "stuffed", but... you see, in Mostar, the city where it is the local very speciality, they call those single onion layers "dolme" (sing. "dolma"), meaning, in that case, obviously, "shirts" (or "robes", if you prefer), obviously from Ottoman "dolaman" (that in those regions had been "dolama").
An user that wanders why he/she should have an user name wanders also
why this is a separate page and wanders if we then should also have articles for patlıcan (egg-plant) biber (pepper) and other dolma types. Off course we should!!! If the basic ingredients are different, the dishes are different! "Dolma" is a type, the group they belong to, and that page certainly should stay. But, there're categories like
"Cabbage dishes",
"Onion-based foods" and so on (as well as the categories treating the horticultural crops), you can't just put the same generic "Dolma" all there around!
Somebody found the links provided in this page were "low-quality", without an explanation why they are "low-quality", let alone any notice about who is to decide which links are "quality" and which aren't (and under what criteria). Obviously, he or she didn't bother to provide any links, let alone "quality" ones; he or she just found himself/herself entitled to cancel what he or she didn't like. And I find perfectly right to restore them!
Kornjaca ( talk) 00:04, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Dear Kornjaca, you are taking very aggressive positions in your edits and your comments above. I'd like to remind you that Wikipedia editing is a collaborative process, and the article doesn't "belong" to any editor or country.
For this edit, your edit summary is "this edit was pure vandalism, arrogant and chauvinistic". I'm sorry you interpret it this way; I certainly didn't intend it that way and recommend that in the future you assume good faith.
As for the substance of the edits:
As for your edits:
Best, -- Macrakis ( talk) 09:56, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
I've seen you've removed everything referring to Turkish stuff (I'm not a Turk), so I assumed such motivation. Im glad if I was wrong and I apologise. Actually I can agree that this is not an article about the word or phrase, but about the dish. I didn't add that category, but it doesn't disturb me if it's there. So, I've restored it along with all the others. It's not about the article, it's about the category. If there is such category, then it would be normal that this article too belong there. Yes, I do find a bit strange that such category exists and I struggle to see any sense. But, as we see - it is here (until some admin decide to cancel it). So... However, I won't undo your last edit and I will stay apart for that matter.
Kornjaca ( talk) 00:28, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Wow what is going on here. I believe you don't get to dictate what to do in Wikipedia so your mood is very questionable and looks uncooperative. Macrakis summarized my thoughts btw, he is right as hell. kazekagetr 22:16, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
The first line of the article clearly says what is it about. Yes, Macrakis gave a reasonable comment.
Kornjaca (
talk)
00:28, 8 February 2015 (UTC)