This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Firstly the introduction is ridiculous and stinks of nationalist edits... Why is the first line of Turkish cuisine underlining 'Turkish cuisine is a fusion and refinement...' really? is that all Ottoman cuisine was? gives the impression they basically took what existed and did very little themselves...
Huge injustice to Ottoman cuisine! we are talking about one of the greatest court cuisines in the history of mankind, it's one of the joys for food historians to research the sheer level of skill and dedication the Ottomans put into their food.
Ottomans were also pioneers and creators of totally new dishes independent of any other influences. Dishes we can call 'Ottoman' no fusion, no refinement, pure and simply Ottoman culinary creations.
New dishes are always being created through human history and we really should give the Ottomans a lot more credit for what they brought to the table - literally. A few very obvious suggestions, Hunkar Begendi, Imam Bayildi, Turkish Coffee, Turkish Delight, Macun, Tavuk Gogusu etc
Secondly, the Turkic influence being put down to Yoghurt is laughable.
The Turkic influence forms the backbone of Turkish cuisine, from yoghurt, to flat pastry (yufka), to the pasta dishes (manti,eriste), to rices, to meat dishes, to bulgur, to gozleme, to borek's, to dairy products the list could go on and on.
I mean come on guys it's pretty logical, the Turks originate from Central Asia and had countless states and Empires across Eurasia and the Near East, many of the dishes above are examples of nomadic/ semi-nomadic heritage.
Thirdly there is no historical background to Turkish cuisine, to the Turkic roots, regional influences, Ottoman developments.
Fourthly there are no links to the countless cook books the Turks wrote, even Kashgarli Mahmud wrote Turkish recipes 1000 years ago in modern day Xinjiang
-- Johnstevens5 ( talk) 03:39, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
What are choring herbs"? Do they really exist as a concept? Aren't all herbs flavouring? -- snoyes 01:37, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I guess these articles address the same issue.. Why don't we merge them? -- SoothingR 11:51, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
November 5th, 2005.
"Greek cuisine is the cuisine of Greece or perhaps of the Greeks"! This is how the Greek Cuisine page starts??!!! But such a point matches with the general attitude of extremely nationalist Greek editors who are obsessed with the Turkish Cuisine?! Is it a coincidence that those who are editing those pages are always the same?! Miskin you know nothing about the Turkish cuisine but you dare to claim the contrary and dont avoid making senseless edits! At least, take your hands off the Turkish Cuisine page. Alternatively, I have to write down the "origines" of the alleged "Greek food" on the "Greek Cuisine" page. And you will feel "disturbed and provoked" again!!! We couldnt be more tolerant with your baseless-senseless edits! Greek cuisine is the cuisine of greeks however Turkish cuisine is not the cuisine of Turks!!! oTTOMANS came and fused all the cuisines of the regions they dominated??? What the hell is that? In addition, as the information starts with the influences staff, it is just a repetition what you insist on adding!...You can not take revenge of the history through the Turkish Cuisine page! Simply you want to present the Turkish cuisine differently from WHAT IT IS. Normally I didnt feel disturbed with this entrance at the beginning. However, after having an illuminating chat with you, I got the nuance?! If you are disturbed by the origines of dolma, we are more right in being disturbed by the presentation of Turkish cuisine like American cuisine which is re-known for being just a fusion (which means there is no such a cuisine). Enough is enough!!!!'According to miskin, the Ottoman Empire and Turkey doesn't contain any Turk? That's why he even gets anxious about calling the cuisine "Turkish Cuisine"!!! Cause he doesnt accept that those who are living in Turkmenistan, Azerbaycan etc. are Turks like some (?!) :) who are living in Turkey?!. However, for us, influences are the richness of Turkish cuisine. Turkish cuisine is not only the cuisine of Turks or of Turkey. It is beyond that. On the other hand, some others feel provoked when someone says the influence of Turkish cuisine on their cuisine despite the fact that Greek cuisine is heavily influenced by Turkish cuisine! An eternal contradiction! Ahh sorry! From their point of view, there is no Turkish cuisine? There are no Turks in Turkey. There is no Turk in the world. Just a fusion??!!!
"Turkish cuisine is the cuisine of the Turkish People."
What the hell?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ar-pharazon ( talk • contribs) .
Someone forgot the teeemplate!! =)))))))))) -- 84.249.252.211 16:50, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
One of the best in the world? A fusion and refinement of? I have a feeling this introduction was written by a Turkish chef.
My source is a Turkish cookbook that was linked in the page with the ref tag, just check the edits before reverting. I don't know who added this link Encyclopedia4U.com but it says more or less the same thing:
Turkic cuisine elements brought from Central Asia were mixed with the cuisines of the previously dominant cultures of Greece, Georgia, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria.
The anon is de-linking the Persian and Greek cuisines and adding text of OR, i.e. Turkish plates being reflected in today's other cuisines, which although true, the same can be said in reverse. Please remove the edits without sources you just restored. This is a serious encyclopedia not a Turkish nationalist playground. Miskin 22:04, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't know what the matter with the anon was, he kept rephrasing pointlessly and changing the order of the words, keeping the word 'Greek' at the end of the sentence. My problem was with his additions of POV edits so I kept reverting all together. And you apparently were blindly giving support to your kinsman's edits. You should never support anon rv-warring, especially when they refuse to participate in discussion. Miskin 22:17, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
By the way, the 'Turkic' element is mentioned right in the next sentence, and since the Ottoman cuisine had also Mongolian and even Chinese origins, 'Central Asian' is more general. What do you think I'd gain by removing a duplication? I'm trying to contribute to the article's readability. Miskin 22:21, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
For crying out loud can you stop making reverts and use the diff a little bit? Why on earth did you remove the elements of the Mongolian cuisine?? Miskin 22:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm not even reverting, I'm making edits. The first link (marked #1, I'm sure you can see it) was added by me, so anything you further say proves your chauvinist blindness. If you honestly believe that "Turkic element" is the nucleus of today's cuisine of Turkey, then I have nothing more to say to you. Go write that the cuisine has got Kemalist elements, I couldn't care less. You'd might come closer to the truth. Miskin 22:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Don't worry but I know a thing or two. What I find annoying is that you commence a content-dispute as an anon and you decide to login later. That isn't very sportsmanlike. Miskin 22:43, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Moved the page from Cuisine of Turkey to Turkish cuisine per all other similar articles: French cuisine, Italian cuisine, Armenian cuisine, Chinese cuisine, Japanese cuisine etc.. Baristarim 20:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
In the case of Turkey it can be misleading. The article describes the cuisine of Turkey, while 'Turkish cuisine' can also refer to countries such as Turkmenistan etc. Miskin 21:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Add more photos please! Other cuisine articles are full of photos. I think there's a rule that we cannot use any image from the web, because of copyright issiues. I'll try to take pictures myself then! 88.254.178.160 22:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
A cheese section should definitely be opened under Turkish cuisine page. Artun Unsal's famous book on the cheese(s) of Turkey will be a great reference... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Z y ( talk • contribs) 22:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC).
I agree completely with User:Z y that Dolma is important and it deserves to be described longly in pages and pages...., but that is why there is a full article on dolma. This is the article on Turkish cuisine, and it seems to me to be over-doldurma with comments about dolma, much of which is redundant: see Talk:Turkish cuisine/Dolma bolluğu, where I've pulled out the various comments on dolma. We should improve the dolma article itself and reduce the dolma stuff(ing) in the Turkish cuisine article. -- Macrakis 05:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Why does it disturb you Macrakis? It was better for you when you were putting or removing whatever you want. The article was terribly poor at that time. This is the way in which dolma should be explained and unless you make a contribution to the article you can not remove it because you find it "redundant". I re-read that part and could not find anything redundant. Etymology was found redundant by yourself however it is quite arguable whether it is redundant or not. Indeed I think the part on dolma is even shorter than it should be. I can not make any comment about the ways of cooking "dolma" in the world whereas I can give information about "dolma" as eaten in Turkey as is in Turkish cuisine.
For example what is that "pilaf"??? Pilav keeps being replaced by "pilaf"..Is it indian cuisine page or something? You can give the equivalents in brackets but why to be so insistent on not using "pilav" in the main text of the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Z y ( talk • contribs) 22:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC).
Claimed English terms are based on the original pronounciation, in other words, "phonetic". Pilaf does not become an English term because it is wronglly written in English. On the Turkish cuisine page we have to give what is original and correct together with English equivalents which in our case can be just "rice". At least we have to put both pilav and pilaf.
It is wonderful to see editors with strong knowledge of Turkish cuisine contributing here. Sometimes their English is not perfect, but that is OK: Wikipedia encourages collaborations among people with varied strengths. Though I surely know much less about Turkish cuisine than many of the expert contributors here, I'm confident that I'm a good editor of English prose. But unfortunately, whenever I try to improve the style, my edits are quickly reverted. This leaves us with frankly atrocious English such as:
It is embarrassing both to Wikipedia and to Turkish cuisine to have such poor prose in the article. But I am tired of trying to improve it when my edits are reverted by others who don't seem to understand basic English style. Therefore,
I will no longer contribute to this article. Sincerely, -- Macrakis 04:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions so far, please contribute more. Since the article is currently being developed greatly, people might not care about copyediting atm, but it should be done, right now. Thanks a lot, again. deniz T C 05:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I am offended :) I feel like clarifying some points. First of all, Macrakis, I do not know why but whenever you "improve" the English of the article, the meaning changes. For example; "depending on climate and geography" is different in meaning from "due to cultural differences" if I am not misunderstanding it because of my poor English. What I am thinking is that some awkward phrases in the article are resulting/remaining from some awkward edits made by "some" people who for example may require "citation" for the food widely consumed for breakfast in Turkey??. After a number of edits/reversions/edits etc. we may end up by this kind of phrases. For some other phrases given as example of "disturbing English", I can not say anything. Sorry for the inconvenience but they seem to be better than the proposed ones! I have not reverted any edit of yours for no reason. Sincerely!--Z y 23:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
For instance, the older version of this "Breakfast in Turkish culture is a rich one due to the fact that a range of products are consumed together" was far better. However someone suggested that a citation was needed?! The description of Turkish breakfast as being "rich" disturbed some people. It is ridiculous but unfortunately true! me again. (unsigned comment)
You are claiming that the WHOLE ARTICLE is not understandable and it is poorly written, which, simply, is NOT TRUE.
As if you were trying to improve the grammar (!) but prevented by ME from doing so!!! That “depending on climate” or “rich due to the fact that” is a product of your work. Not mine?? Turkish breakfast was just rich once upon a time…A better description was not proposed as far as I remember. It was simply DELETED.
“Due to the fact that” can be used interchangeably with “because”? “Clumsy”..maybe? “Because”, “because”, “because” every time may be boring as well? Are we in TOEFL or in English Class?
When you “improve” my phrasing, do you have to change the EMPHASIS or the MEANING? That's my question. I feel obliged to repeat: I have not reverted any edit of yours for no reason! As if I was obsessed with the expression of “due to the fact that”??? I will not become crazy if I don’t see it there?!
On the ground of 2-3 phrases, you despise the entire article. This is not only unjust but also unfair! Ops sorry. “Much of your phrasing simply isn't good English”. NO COMMENT. Since you are the only one who knows English, since you were born and raised in the US, I have to shut my mouth up and respect… What does that famous Wikipedia Policy say? I am required to have your approval of my level of English to edit the article. Ok. I will try to keep it in my mind.--Z y 23:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Some of your edits may have been reverted too. Sorry, if you get frustrated. I can recommend you to contribute to the article. Not just by rephrasing some phrases but by adding info etc. In addition, before criticising people, bother checking what the one who attacked me proposed in the past, which edits of him/her were reverted etc.
Frankly, it took so much time to frustrate people who were trying to present Turkish cuisine as a mere fusion, who were discussing the Turkishness of our cuisine and even questionning whether it can be called Turkish (see above) I do not have a negative image of frustration :)
By the way, while recommending me to take a breathe, you seem to be needing to check the older versions of the article. Full point. --Z y 14:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
French version of Turkish cuisine needs to be taken care of. Although having studied French for 12 years, I am not comfortable with it anymore as I am with English. Those who know French should help improve the article at "fr.wikipedia.org" - cuisine Turque. -- Z y Talk 11:39, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
What is the problem of compliance with wiki's content policies? -- Z y Talk 13:42, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Chapultepec ( talk) 18:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
In the article there is the following text: "This was a popular drink in western Europe before coffee was brought from America and came to be known." which refers to some drink made from orchid roots. I'm wondering, however, where the author got the idea that coffee was brought from America. As should be well known, coffee originated in Ethiopia, and was used in the middle east and Europe before being introduced to the Americas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.170.191 ( talk) 22:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
This article is clearly insufficient in reflecting the incredible diversity of Turkish Cuisine, that has 660 dishes out of just the Eggplant. Also One must stress the two different cuisines of Turkey, the Home one and the Street one, since both are very large. I would gladly do all of these but I have a college to follow, so this is why I am asking your help, fellow wikipedians.! Cheers! -- Eae1983 ( talk) 14:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
PS: When one rolls down from the start of the article, I'd say the döner kebab comes "too early", way before plate dishes. Also, a Baba Ğannuş or Ebu Ğannuş is NOT an Aubergine Salad, those two are different things!
Cheers! -- Eae1983 ( talk) 14:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I do not think that the difference between street food and home-made food is a decisive one in Turkey. Especially for a country that has "esnaf lokantasi" tradition. As for babagannus, I agree with you totally. But it is not possible to control everything here. And sometimes, we should admit that it helps making reference to analogies. Incredible diversity of Turkish cuisine should be reflected no doubt. BUT for this, everybody should contribute...No book that lists all has been written yet, if it can be. -- Z y Talk 21:05, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
There are literally hundreds of types of Borek and Chorek, yes there is a pastry section however, this type of cuisine is so diverse it requires its own category. Boreks and Coreks have a special place in not just Turkish but all Turkic cusines, from Turkmenistan to Tataristan, Azerbaijan to Uzbekistan.
Also Manti is a not just a dish from the Kayseri region, its shared across the Turkic world and there are hundreds of variations, this may also need its own section.
-- Torke ( talk) 00:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Kayseri is not the only city where manti is eaten..sure..but in Turkey, Kayseri is famous for its manti and it is worth mentioning it I suppose. Borek/Corek needs a separate page maybe I agree...Especially special emphasis on the layered dough style developed in Turkic regions, is needed -- Z y Talk 21:10, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
i is enjoy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boynuzlu ( talk • contribs) 17:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Is there a Turkish dish called "biryam"? There is a Greek dish called briami, which Greek dictionaries say comes from Turkish biryam, but I haven't been able to find any modern references to biryam; my Ottoman dictionary has بریان biryan meaning 'roast' or 'roast meat with rice'. But the Greek dish is meatless, consisting of zucchini, potatoes, etc. roasted in the oven with oil, like türlü. (The word is of course related to the Persian بریان beryān and the Indian biryani.) Please answer on my user page. Thanks. -- macrakis ( talk) 22:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
For an article with a "top" class importance on Wikiproject Turkey, that ones fails awfully. I mean even the Döner and the Ayran pics are taken outside of Turkey, and are "delocalized" versions... Doesn't anyone have something better? -- 85.99.77.96 ( talk) 15:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
There are a couple assertions made sourced from material written by Perry Charles that warrant being qualified with the supporting material:
To qualify number 1, we would need sources demonstrating the earlist appearance of the dough style AND that the contemporary use came from this source. How were Wester/Central/Western Asian Turks differentiated? How is the development of use attributed to a nomadic lifestyle as apposed to a semi-sedentary or sedentary life style?
The the 2nd point is one of cause and effect- not co-development. Essentially the assertion is that the product was developed because of the tool- not that the tool was produced for the purpose producing the product, or that the tool usage and product form evolved in an inextricable fashion. The conclusion is remarkable, and warrants production of the supporting material. Mavigogun ( talk) 05:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
The question is not whether I want to or have to participate but it is rather whether we have to change the article on the basis of your comments.
With regard to "co-development", I understood what you asked and answered the question above. Actually it is not me who is answering but the relevant sources. "Which one comes first question (sac or layered dough)" is partly answered in the article. You were the one who seemed to be contesting the given account. And what I said was that we did no more than to pass on the info. gathered from the sources. That's what users do in wikipedia if I am not wrong.
With regard to the compliance of the given account with the sources referred to, I do not know what makes you feel that the article does not reflect "accurately" the sources' position. If you have doubts, then have a look at the given sources and the biblography.
The way you initially put your case above gives the impression that the problem goes beyond the issue of "imprecise wording". However, this turns out to be a false impression. As Chapultepec solved your problem, then there is no need for further discussion I suppose. -- Z y Talk 11:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Check this, Perry, Charles. "The Taste for Layered Bread among the Nomadic Turks and the Central Asian Origins of Baklava", in A Taste of Thyme: Culinary Cultures of the Middle East (ed. Sami Zubaida, Richard Tapper), 1994. p. 89. Together with Roden if you want. -- Z y Talk 11:35, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Sure. -- Z y Talk 16:51, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
I think the list of Turkish kebaps should be reintroduced to the main page. -- Z y Talk 22:15, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
This wasnt much help! Got anh HELPFUL web links? I COULD USE IT!! THANX —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.40.92.21 (
talk)
21:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Just wanted to say what an informative, helpful article this was to me! My compliments to everyone who contributed =) Vought109 ( talk) 01:29, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
There's a lack of information on the bread section and it is missing the most important type of bread ( http://www.iyiekmek.com/ekmekbey.jpg) which is simply called Ekmek (bread) in Turkish. Bread is eaten with almost every meal, and it significantly contributes to the way people eat, and the variety of dishes. Most dishes are in Turkey have a soup (watery) base this is because ekmek is usually used to eat a dish where one would dip the bread in the juices and take the parts of the food with the bread, almost using it like a spoon. This is so common in Turkey that I would guess that almost all of the meals are eaten with bread (from breakfast to dinner). I really think this should be indicated in the Turkish cuisine.
Tolgaek ( talk) 15:38, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
McDonald's and Burger King, Starbucks in Istanbul are more expensve than the ones in NY, and star cheats forex; carrot cakes without cheesecream topping with no admit, No natural juice or seldom above %50 without sugar despite the brands carry stamp of "Katkısız" Reality to me very Arh+ and expensive and beans mixed with rice cost 4Usd. Meat is luxury as usually chicken converted ther döner as its unique sample So be careful to ask if its real meat before consumption. Since im allergic to fish, daily cheapest suggest you is popular anchovy which ought to be raw, 3 fried mussells starts 2.8Usd (3.5Tl) if not not want to look a beggar. Pork...unquestionable import goods, 6-7slices 10Usd (19Tl) in malls ie. Carrefour. Same rank with the ones next level to the wiev of golden gate. For cheese try to naturel ones, A little rushy jam, square typed pale buildings, tea with sesamed simits.. and the Ankara where after the un blended food may begins. But wait there is a no overweight women there but osteo loss maynot be, humble and fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.47.190.24 ( talk) 09:10, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
No its not, since turks kept desert sodas in refrigerator and seldom organic juices on the shelves, since they intake vitamin C from tomatopaste or lettuce with appetizers and bread which daily nutrition mostly consisting of, contrary to mussels getting pricely, alien protein are the porg, camel, stag, oyster, shark or kımız some goods ie possible in the franchised malls.
I am removing this. I asked on the Jewish food page if anyone could be specific or provide reference of specific influence of Jewish cuisine on Turkish cuisine but they could not. None of the dishes I would think of as classically Jewish such as latke, matzoh, challah, bagels, etc. are featured in Turkish cuisine. Burek, dolma, etc are regional, they don't belong to any ethnic group. For example, burek comes to Turkish cuisine from the balkans region. Christians, Jews and Muslims in the balkans all make this dish. Deleted. Seraphimsystem ( talk) 22:30, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
The introductory presentation of Turkish cuisine as a heritage from the Ottoman cuisine was fairly stable for many years, describing the Ottoman kitchen as a "fusion and refinement of Central Asian, Middle Eastern and Balkan cuisines". At one point, however, it turned into a kind of competition about what kitchens to mention specifically. Almost needless to say, nobody has bothered to come up with references that put emphasis to specific cuisines; mainly it has been POV edits in order to mention, or not mention, Greek, Albanian, Circassian, Arab, Jewish, Kurdish etc. I will now put the text back to its original, neutral and sourced version. Any changes should be discussed in the talk page before implementation. Please behave. Regards! -- T*U ( talk) 10:51, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 02:08, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Firstly the introduction is ridiculous and stinks of nationalist edits... Why is the first line of Turkish cuisine underlining 'Turkish cuisine is a fusion and refinement...' really? is that all Ottoman cuisine was? gives the impression they basically took what existed and did very little themselves...
Huge injustice to Ottoman cuisine! we are talking about one of the greatest court cuisines in the history of mankind, it's one of the joys for food historians to research the sheer level of skill and dedication the Ottomans put into their food.
Ottomans were also pioneers and creators of totally new dishes independent of any other influences. Dishes we can call 'Ottoman' no fusion, no refinement, pure and simply Ottoman culinary creations.
New dishes are always being created through human history and we really should give the Ottomans a lot more credit for what they brought to the table - literally. A few very obvious suggestions, Hunkar Begendi, Imam Bayildi, Turkish Coffee, Turkish Delight, Macun, Tavuk Gogusu etc
Secondly, the Turkic influence being put down to Yoghurt is laughable.
The Turkic influence forms the backbone of Turkish cuisine, from yoghurt, to flat pastry (yufka), to the pasta dishes (manti,eriste), to rices, to meat dishes, to bulgur, to gozleme, to borek's, to dairy products the list could go on and on.
I mean come on guys it's pretty logical, the Turks originate from Central Asia and had countless states and Empires across Eurasia and the Near East, many of the dishes above are examples of nomadic/ semi-nomadic heritage.
Thirdly there is no historical background to Turkish cuisine, to the Turkic roots, regional influences, Ottoman developments.
Fourthly there are no links to the countless cook books the Turks wrote, even Kashgarli Mahmud wrote Turkish recipes 1000 years ago in modern day Xinjiang
-- Johnstevens5 ( talk) 03:39, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
What are choring herbs"? Do they really exist as a concept? Aren't all herbs flavouring? -- snoyes 01:37, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)
I guess these articles address the same issue.. Why don't we merge them? -- SoothingR 11:51, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
November 5th, 2005.
"Greek cuisine is the cuisine of Greece or perhaps of the Greeks"! This is how the Greek Cuisine page starts??!!! But such a point matches with the general attitude of extremely nationalist Greek editors who are obsessed with the Turkish Cuisine?! Is it a coincidence that those who are editing those pages are always the same?! Miskin you know nothing about the Turkish cuisine but you dare to claim the contrary and dont avoid making senseless edits! At least, take your hands off the Turkish Cuisine page. Alternatively, I have to write down the "origines" of the alleged "Greek food" on the "Greek Cuisine" page. And you will feel "disturbed and provoked" again!!! We couldnt be more tolerant with your baseless-senseless edits! Greek cuisine is the cuisine of greeks however Turkish cuisine is not the cuisine of Turks!!! oTTOMANS came and fused all the cuisines of the regions they dominated??? What the hell is that? In addition, as the information starts with the influences staff, it is just a repetition what you insist on adding!...You can not take revenge of the history through the Turkish Cuisine page! Simply you want to present the Turkish cuisine differently from WHAT IT IS. Normally I didnt feel disturbed with this entrance at the beginning. However, after having an illuminating chat with you, I got the nuance?! If you are disturbed by the origines of dolma, we are more right in being disturbed by the presentation of Turkish cuisine like American cuisine which is re-known for being just a fusion (which means there is no such a cuisine). Enough is enough!!!!'According to miskin, the Ottoman Empire and Turkey doesn't contain any Turk? That's why he even gets anxious about calling the cuisine "Turkish Cuisine"!!! Cause he doesnt accept that those who are living in Turkmenistan, Azerbaycan etc. are Turks like some (?!) :) who are living in Turkey?!. However, for us, influences are the richness of Turkish cuisine. Turkish cuisine is not only the cuisine of Turks or of Turkey. It is beyond that. On the other hand, some others feel provoked when someone says the influence of Turkish cuisine on their cuisine despite the fact that Greek cuisine is heavily influenced by Turkish cuisine! An eternal contradiction! Ahh sorry! From their point of view, there is no Turkish cuisine? There are no Turks in Turkey. There is no Turk in the world. Just a fusion??!!!
"Turkish cuisine is the cuisine of the Turkish People."
What the hell?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ar-pharazon ( talk • contribs) .
Someone forgot the teeemplate!! =)))))))))) -- 84.249.252.211 16:50, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
One of the best in the world? A fusion and refinement of? I have a feeling this introduction was written by a Turkish chef.
My source is a Turkish cookbook that was linked in the page with the ref tag, just check the edits before reverting. I don't know who added this link Encyclopedia4U.com but it says more or less the same thing:
Turkic cuisine elements brought from Central Asia were mixed with the cuisines of the previously dominant cultures of Greece, Georgia, Lebanon, Jordan and Syria.
The anon is de-linking the Persian and Greek cuisines and adding text of OR, i.e. Turkish plates being reflected in today's other cuisines, which although true, the same can be said in reverse. Please remove the edits without sources you just restored. This is a serious encyclopedia not a Turkish nationalist playground. Miskin 22:04, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't know what the matter with the anon was, he kept rephrasing pointlessly and changing the order of the words, keeping the word 'Greek' at the end of the sentence. My problem was with his additions of POV edits so I kept reverting all together. And you apparently were blindly giving support to your kinsman's edits. You should never support anon rv-warring, especially when they refuse to participate in discussion. Miskin 22:17, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
By the way, the 'Turkic' element is mentioned right in the next sentence, and since the Ottoman cuisine had also Mongolian and even Chinese origins, 'Central Asian' is more general. What do you think I'd gain by removing a duplication? I'm trying to contribute to the article's readability. Miskin 22:21, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
For crying out loud can you stop making reverts and use the diff a little bit? Why on earth did you remove the elements of the Mongolian cuisine?? Miskin 22:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm not even reverting, I'm making edits. The first link (marked #1, I'm sure you can see it) was added by me, so anything you further say proves your chauvinist blindness. If you honestly believe that "Turkic element" is the nucleus of today's cuisine of Turkey, then I have nothing more to say to you. Go write that the cuisine has got Kemalist elements, I couldn't care less. You'd might come closer to the truth. Miskin 22:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Don't worry but I know a thing or two. What I find annoying is that you commence a content-dispute as an anon and you decide to login later. That isn't very sportsmanlike. Miskin 22:43, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Moved the page from Cuisine of Turkey to Turkish cuisine per all other similar articles: French cuisine, Italian cuisine, Armenian cuisine, Chinese cuisine, Japanese cuisine etc.. Baristarim 20:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
In the case of Turkey it can be misleading. The article describes the cuisine of Turkey, while 'Turkish cuisine' can also refer to countries such as Turkmenistan etc. Miskin 21:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Add more photos please! Other cuisine articles are full of photos. I think there's a rule that we cannot use any image from the web, because of copyright issiues. I'll try to take pictures myself then! 88.254.178.160 22:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
A cheese section should definitely be opened under Turkish cuisine page. Artun Unsal's famous book on the cheese(s) of Turkey will be a great reference... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Z y ( talk • contribs) 22:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC).
I agree completely with User:Z y that Dolma is important and it deserves to be described longly in pages and pages...., but that is why there is a full article on dolma. This is the article on Turkish cuisine, and it seems to me to be over-doldurma with comments about dolma, much of which is redundant: see Talk:Turkish cuisine/Dolma bolluğu, where I've pulled out the various comments on dolma. We should improve the dolma article itself and reduce the dolma stuff(ing) in the Turkish cuisine article. -- Macrakis 05:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Why does it disturb you Macrakis? It was better for you when you were putting or removing whatever you want. The article was terribly poor at that time. This is the way in which dolma should be explained and unless you make a contribution to the article you can not remove it because you find it "redundant". I re-read that part and could not find anything redundant. Etymology was found redundant by yourself however it is quite arguable whether it is redundant or not. Indeed I think the part on dolma is even shorter than it should be. I can not make any comment about the ways of cooking "dolma" in the world whereas I can give information about "dolma" as eaten in Turkey as is in Turkish cuisine.
For example what is that "pilaf"??? Pilav keeps being replaced by "pilaf"..Is it indian cuisine page or something? You can give the equivalents in brackets but why to be so insistent on not using "pilav" in the main text of the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Z y ( talk • contribs) 22:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC).
Claimed English terms are based on the original pronounciation, in other words, "phonetic". Pilaf does not become an English term because it is wronglly written in English. On the Turkish cuisine page we have to give what is original and correct together with English equivalents which in our case can be just "rice". At least we have to put both pilav and pilaf.
It is wonderful to see editors with strong knowledge of Turkish cuisine contributing here. Sometimes their English is not perfect, but that is OK: Wikipedia encourages collaborations among people with varied strengths. Though I surely know much less about Turkish cuisine than many of the expert contributors here, I'm confident that I'm a good editor of English prose. But unfortunately, whenever I try to improve the style, my edits are quickly reverted. This leaves us with frankly atrocious English such as:
It is embarrassing both to Wikipedia and to Turkish cuisine to have such poor prose in the article. But I am tired of trying to improve it when my edits are reverted by others who don't seem to understand basic English style. Therefore,
I will no longer contribute to this article. Sincerely, -- Macrakis 04:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions so far, please contribute more. Since the article is currently being developed greatly, people might not care about copyediting atm, but it should be done, right now. Thanks a lot, again. deniz T C 05:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I am offended :) I feel like clarifying some points. First of all, Macrakis, I do not know why but whenever you "improve" the English of the article, the meaning changes. For example; "depending on climate and geography" is different in meaning from "due to cultural differences" if I am not misunderstanding it because of my poor English. What I am thinking is that some awkward phrases in the article are resulting/remaining from some awkward edits made by "some" people who for example may require "citation" for the food widely consumed for breakfast in Turkey??. After a number of edits/reversions/edits etc. we may end up by this kind of phrases. For some other phrases given as example of "disturbing English", I can not say anything. Sorry for the inconvenience but they seem to be better than the proposed ones! I have not reverted any edit of yours for no reason. Sincerely!--Z y 23:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
For instance, the older version of this "Breakfast in Turkish culture is a rich one due to the fact that a range of products are consumed together" was far better. However someone suggested that a citation was needed?! The description of Turkish breakfast as being "rich" disturbed some people. It is ridiculous but unfortunately true! me again. (unsigned comment)
You are claiming that the WHOLE ARTICLE is not understandable and it is poorly written, which, simply, is NOT TRUE.
As if you were trying to improve the grammar (!) but prevented by ME from doing so!!! That “depending on climate” or “rich due to the fact that” is a product of your work. Not mine?? Turkish breakfast was just rich once upon a time…A better description was not proposed as far as I remember. It was simply DELETED.
“Due to the fact that” can be used interchangeably with “because”? “Clumsy”..maybe? “Because”, “because”, “because” every time may be boring as well? Are we in TOEFL or in English Class?
When you “improve” my phrasing, do you have to change the EMPHASIS or the MEANING? That's my question. I feel obliged to repeat: I have not reverted any edit of yours for no reason! As if I was obsessed with the expression of “due to the fact that”??? I will not become crazy if I don’t see it there?!
On the ground of 2-3 phrases, you despise the entire article. This is not only unjust but also unfair! Ops sorry. “Much of your phrasing simply isn't good English”. NO COMMENT. Since you are the only one who knows English, since you were born and raised in the US, I have to shut my mouth up and respect… What does that famous Wikipedia Policy say? I am required to have your approval of my level of English to edit the article. Ok. I will try to keep it in my mind.--Z y 23:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Some of your edits may have been reverted too. Sorry, if you get frustrated. I can recommend you to contribute to the article. Not just by rephrasing some phrases but by adding info etc. In addition, before criticising people, bother checking what the one who attacked me proposed in the past, which edits of him/her were reverted etc.
Frankly, it took so much time to frustrate people who were trying to present Turkish cuisine as a mere fusion, who were discussing the Turkishness of our cuisine and even questionning whether it can be called Turkish (see above) I do not have a negative image of frustration :)
By the way, while recommending me to take a breathe, you seem to be needing to check the older versions of the article. Full point. --Z y 14:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
French version of Turkish cuisine needs to be taken care of. Although having studied French for 12 years, I am not comfortable with it anymore as I am with English. Those who know French should help improve the article at "fr.wikipedia.org" - cuisine Turque. -- Z y Talk 11:39, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
What is the problem of compliance with wiki's content policies? -- Z y Talk 13:42, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Chapultepec ( talk) 18:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
In the article there is the following text: "This was a popular drink in western Europe before coffee was brought from America and came to be known." which refers to some drink made from orchid roots. I'm wondering, however, where the author got the idea that coffee was brought from America. As should be well known, coffee originated in Ethiopia, and was used in the middle east and Europe before being introduced to the Americas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.170.191 ( talk) 22:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
This article is clearly insufficient in reflecting the incredible diversity of Turkish Cuisine, that has 660 dishes out of just the Eggplant. Also One must stress the two different cuisines of Turkey, the Home one and the Street one, since both are very large. I would gladly do all of these but I have a college to follow, so this is why I am asking your help, fellow wikipedians.! Cheers! -- Eae1983 ( talk) 14:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
PS: When one rolls down from the start of the article, I'd say the döner kebab comes "too early", way before plate dishes. Also, a Baba Ğannuş or Ebu Ğannuş is NOT an Aubergine Salad, those two are different things!
Cheers! -- Eae1983 ( talk) 14:15, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
I do not think that the difference between street food and home-made food is a decisive one in Turkey. Especially for a country that has "esnaf lokantasi" tradition. As for babagannus, I agree with you totally. But it is not possible to control everything here. And sometimes, we should admit that it helps making reference to analogies. Incredible diversity of Turkish cuisine should be reflected no doubt. BUT for this, everybody should contribute...No book that lists all has been written yet, if it can be. -- Z y Talk 21:05, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
There are literally hundreds of types of Borek and Chorek, yes there is a pastry section however, this type of cuisine is so diverse it requires its own category. Boreks and Coreks have a special place in not just Turkish but all Turkic cusines, from Turkmenistan to Tataristan, Azerbaijan to Uzbekistan.
Also Manti is a not just a dish from the Kayseri region, its shared across the Turkic world and there are hundreds of variations, this may also need its own section.
-- Torke ( talk) 00:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Kayseri is not the only city where manti is eaten..sure..but in Turkey, Kayseri is famous for its manti and it is worth mentioning it I suppose. Borek/Corek needs a separate page maybe I agree...Especially special emphasis on the layered dough style developed in Turkic regions, is needed -- Z y Talk 21:10, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
i is enjoy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boynuzlu ( talk • contribs) 17:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Is there a Turkish dish called "biryam"? There is a Greek dish called briami, which Greek dictionaries say comes from Turkish biryam, but I haven't been able to find any modern references to biryam; my Ottoman dictionary has بریان biryan meaning 'roast' or 'roast meat with rice'. But the Greek dish is meatless, consisting of zucchini, potatoes, etc. roasted in the oven with oil, like türlü. (The word is of course related to the Persian بریان beryān and the Indian biryani.) Please answer on my user page. Thanks. -- macrakis ( talk) 22:05, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
For an article with a "top" class importance on Wikiproject Turkey, that ones fails awfully. I mean even the Döner and the Ayran pics are taken outside of Turkey, and are "delocalized" versions... Doesn't anyone have something better? -- 85.99.77.96 ( talk) 15:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
There are a couple assertions made sourced from material written by Perry Charles that warrant being qualified with the supporting material:
To qualify number 1, we would need sources demonstrating the earlist appearance of the dough style AND that the contemporary use came from this source. How were Wester/Central/Western Asian Turks differentiated? How is the development of use attributed to a nomadic lifestyle as apposed to a semi-sedentary or sedentary life style?
The the 2nd point is one of cause and effect- not co-development. Essentially the assertion is that the product was developed because of the tool- not that the tool was produced for the purpose producing the product, or that the tool usage and product form evolved in an inextricable fashion. The conclusion is remarkable, and warrants production of the supporting material. Mavigogun ( talk) 05:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
The question is not whether I want to or have to participate but it is rather whether we have to change the article on the basis of your comments.
With regard to "co-development", I understood what you asked and answered the question above. Actually it is not me who is answering but the relevant sources. "Which one comes first question (sac or layered dough)" is partly answered in the article. You were the one who seemed to be contesting the given account. And what I said was that we did no more than to pass on the info. gathered from the sources. That's what users do in wikipedia if I am not wrong.
With regard to the compliance of the given account with the sources referred to, I do not know what makes you feel that the article does not reflect "accurately" the sources' position. If you have doubts, then have a look at the given sources and the biblography.
The way you initially put your case above gives the impression that the problem goes beyond the issue of "imprecise wording". However, this turns out to be a false impression. As Chapultepec solved your problem, then there is no need for further discussion I suppose. -- Z y Talk 11:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Check this, Perry, Charles. "The Taste for Layered Bread among the Nomadic Turks and the Central Asian Origins of Baklava", in A Taste of Thyme: Culinary Cultures of the Middle East (ed. Sami Zubaida, Richard Tapper), 1994. p. 89. Together with Roden if you want. -- Z y Talk 11:35, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Sure. -- Z y Talk 16:51, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
I think the list of Turkish kebaps should be reintroduced to the main page. -- Z y Talk 22:15, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
This wasnt much help! Got anh HELPFUL web links? I COULD USE IT!! THANX —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.40.92.21 (
talk)
21:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Just wanted to say what an informative, helpful article this was to me! My compliments to everyone who contributed =) Vought109 ( talk) 01:29, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
There's a lack of information on the bread section and it is missing the most important type of bread ( http://www.iyiekmek.com/ekmekbey.jpg) which is simply called Ekmek (bread) in Turkish. Bread is eaten with almost every meal, and it significantly contributes to the way people eat, and the variety of dishes. Most dishes are in Turkey have a soup (watery) base this is because ekmek is usually used to eat a dish where one would dip the bread in the juices and take the parts of the food with the bread, almost using it like a spoon. This is so common in Turkey that I would guess that almost all of the meals are eaten with bread (from breakfast to dinner). I really think this should be indicated in the Turkish cuisine.
Tolgaek ( talk) 15:38, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
McDonald's and Burger King, Starbucks in Istanbul are more expensve than the ones in NY, and star cheats forex; carrot cakes without cheesecream topping with no admit, No natural juice or seldom above %50 without sugar despite the brands carry stamp of "Katkısız" Reality to me very Arh+ and expensive and beans mixed with rice cost 4Usd. Meat is luxury as usually chicken converted ther döner as its unique sample So be careful to ask if its real meat before consumption. Since im allergic to fish, daily cheapest suggest you is popular anchovy which ought to be raw, 3 fried mussells starts 2.8Usd (3.5Tl) if not not want to look a beggar. Pork...unquestionable import goods, 6-7slices 10Usd (19Tl) in malls ie. Carrefour. Same rank with the ones next level to the wiev of golden gate. For cheese try to naturel ones, A little rushy jam, square typed pale buildings, tea with sesamed simits.. and the Ankara where after the un blended food may begins. But wait there is a no overweight women there but osteo loss maynot be, humble and fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.47.190.24 ( talk) 09:10, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
No its not, since turks kept desert sodas in refrigerator and seldom organic juices on the shelves, since they intake vitamin C from tomatopaste or lettuce with appetizers and bread which daily nutrition mostly consisting of, contrary to mussels getting pricely, alien protein are the porg, camel, stag, oyster, shark or kımız some goods ie possible in the franchised malls.
I am removing this. I asked on the Jewish food page if anyone could be specific or provide reference of specific influence of Jewish cuisine on Turkish cuisine but they could not. None of the dishes I would think of as classically Jewish such as latke, matzoh, challah, bagels, etc. are featured in Turkish cuisine. Burek, dolma, etc are regional, they don't belong to any ethnic group. For example, burek comes to Turkish cuisine from the balkans region. Christians, Jews and Muslims in the balkans all make this dish. Deleted. Seraphimsystem ( talk) 22:30, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
The introductory presentation of Turkish cuisine as a heritage from the Ottoman cuisine was fairly stable for many years, describing the Ottoman kitchen as a "fusion and refinement of Central Asian, Middle Eastern and Balkan cuisines". At one point, however, it turned into a kind of competition about what kitchens to mention specifically. Almost needless to say, nobody has bothered to come up with references that put emphasis to specific cuisines; mainly it has been POV edits in order to mention, or not mention, Greek, Albanian, Circassian, Arab, Jewish, Kurdish etc. I will now put the text back to its original, neutral and sourced version. Any changes should be discussed in the talk page before implementation. Please behave. Regards! -- T*U ( talk) 10:51, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 02:08, 19 July 2022 (UTC)