User talk:Rollinginhisgrave: Difference between revisions

Line 104: Line 104:

:I don’t see any hits in the major food journals (”[[Food & History]]”, ”[[Gastronomica]]”, ”[[Petits Propos Culinaires]]”, ”[[Appetite (journal)|Appetite]]”…). I’ll look into this for you, although annoyingly I have lost access to a cache of books when my computer broke recently. I had a good experience yesterday when I used the ask a librarian feature at the [[Biblioteca Nazionale Vittorio Emanuele III]] while researching [[Neapolitan ragù]]; I see the [[Austrian National Library]] offers the same service. [[User:Rollinginhisgrave|Rollinginhisgrave]] ([[User talk:Rollinginhisgrave|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Rollinginhisgrave|edits]]) 00:44, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks. I’ll look what I’m able to find. [[User:Vacant0|Vacant0]] ([[User talk:Vacant0|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Vacant0|contribs]]) 11:52, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

== [[Kit Kats in Japan]] ==

I see that you’re working on chocolate in Japan. This article could be interesting to you. All I could find here in local stores are the dark and white Kit Kat. [[User:Vacant0|Vacant0]] ([[User talk:Vacant0|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Vacant0|contribs]]) 15:49, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Archives

Index

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be auto-archived by ClueBot III if there are more than 5.

The article The Oxford Companion to Sugar and Sweets you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Oxford Companion to Sugar and Sweets for comments about the article, and Talk:The Oxford Companion to Sugar and Sweets/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the “Did you know” section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kusma — Kusma (talk) 15:07, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rollinginhisgrave. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Chocolate in Japan, a page you created, has not been edited in at least five months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:05, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just got back from a break. I barely edited between late August and today because of some real life stuff. But now that’s settled down. I also noticed that you took a break. What are you up to lately? I need to check from where I left off and continue from there. There’s a lot to do. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, glad to see you’re back. My break has also been thanks to real life, the impacts of which look like will continue for a while. I might shoot you an email to hear what you’ve been up to if you’re up to it. I wanted to tell you btw, that I realised in our cider project that I was collecting sources on hard cider. Maybe we could pivot, I don’t really care as much about pressed apple juice. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 17:11, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah go for it. I’ll tackle apple cider alone. Maybe we could work on Chocolate brownie or Chocolate chip cookie? Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rollinginhisgrave. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, “Chocolate in Japan“.

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:09, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rollinginhisgrave, many thanks for your feedback; I’ve now implemented all your very helpful suggestions. I’ve also inserted a timeline which may (ha!) help reduce the likelihood of further kerfuffles. I’m asking here because my questions are … somewhat sensitive to some people.

A specific issue is that in response to earlier pressures, we removed the statement, made by both Collingham (British) and Batsha (Indian) that nothing called “curry” existed pre-Columbus. For anyone of a saffronising agenda, that seems like we’re claiming that curry isn’t Indian (so they go ape). Actually we’re saying several things:

1) curry has been created by multiple cultural interchanges, not all starting in India;

2) many Indian dishes, only a few of them named kari, became spicy in this process, and quite a few of them could loosely be called curries;

3) the etymology of “curry” from Tamil kari does not prove culinary equivalence or even culinary continuity (the etymological fallacy);

4) the modern “curry” isn’t any of the Indian dishes, exactly, being an assemblage that can loosely include condiments, papadoms and so forth to form a complete dinner.

I hope the article makes most of those points more or less clearly, even without the Collingham/Batsha statement. Do you think it feasible (and necessary) to re-insert the statement in some form? And, do you think we need to say anything more on points 1..4 above?

Any thoughts would be much appreciated. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:10, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Who could have imagined this topic might attract strong feelings? Thankyou for getting on those points so promptly; I really could have worked in proto-curry item myself but your treatment was a lot better than how I would have handled it. I want to give the article another proper read over the next day before I comment in any depth, but the points you give above generally make sense, particularly the etymology one. I won’t be too long. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 16:24, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I’ll get some more nitpicky points out of the way:

I think the lead gives too much emphasis to the Dutch, which is easy enough to fix.
The proto-curries of medieval pre-Columbian India were accordingly quite unlike modern international curries… I don’t think this is supported by the text, which is making a general point about how spiced dishes were diverse, and that the label curry was flattening rather than making claims about their dissimilarity to the modern international curry.

Besides that, I really like the points you articulate above. I think where we can improve is that the article has a tight rope to walk between giving a history of the concept (what people were talking about when they said curry, and how that changed), and the history of “dish[es] with a sauce or gravy seasoned with spices”. Ideally we could just give a history of the latter, but I am finding it is inviting too many issues with cut-off points and “are we at curry yet or are we still in proto-curry?” So I think we should describe both, for example: the Portugese introduced the chili and it had this effect on Indian cooking, at the same time the Portugese heard the word Caril and used a derivative, curry, as a generic term for Indian cooking (maybe we could iron out if when the sources say that they mean spiced cooking). Do you think that would make it clearer or more confused? Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 12:29, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the pain, but there is no obvious way to separate talk of spicy Indian cooking and curry, any more than we can say if the psalmist is distinguishing between “cymbals” and “loud cymbals”. Indian sources before the late 20th century don’t say “curry” or use any equivalent term for “all Indian spicy dishes”, they just talk about main courses and side dishes with many different names. Western authors just use the term indiscriminately for Indian dishes, Western dishes based on them, and anything anywhere (Japan, Malaysia, Thailand, …) that uses curry powder. The underlying issue is, as often with arguments on Wikipedia, a matter of definitions, and it’s remarkably unobvious how to introduce those definitions so as to quell the discomfort. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:55, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, there being no obvious way to separate spicy Indian cooking and curry was my point that I was (poorly) trying to articulate. My suggestion was to not try, and instead explicitly track the development of the concept and the development of dishes in two streams, at times interjecting with “this is where X author draws the line of modern curry”. I still think the article gets across the important information and is well-done. I may come by and write up a mock-up so what I am saying is clearer, but I don’t have the energy at the moment to engage with that talk page in any concerted way. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 12:55, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven’t started looking for sources for our work on brownies because I’m working on three projects simultaneously atm, but I made some brownies for Halloween in the meantime! They were tasty. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:29, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s a hallowed tradition to overcommit on Wikipedia. Looking forward to working on the page with you, and your brownies look excellent. We’ll see if we need to cook more to illustrate along the lines of this video. I was considering making some Neapolitan ragù to add images, but it is a big commitment. Maybe in a few weeks. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 12:47, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck! Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey RIHG, hope all’s well 🙂

Was wondering if you might have a few minutes to give a quick once-over to the Lynch Fragments article. I’m in the middle of FAC with it and I made some big structural changes, hoping to just get a sense of whether the new structure is logical. Absolutely no worries if you’re tied up with other stuff, just figured I’d ask as I know you’ve got a great eye for reviewing. Realizing I probably should have gone through another round of Peer Review before sending it on to FAC haha. (And I have not forgotten about the PR for the Cady Noland article – as you told Vacant0 above, it’s a hallowed tradition to overcommit lol)

Either way, hope you’re doing well and that you have a good week/weekend! 19h00s (talk) 15:03, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @19h00s, thanks for reaching out. The article looks broadly good, particularly in your handling of the exhibition history, and I always like your writing style. I have a few comments that I may bring by the FAC if I have time, but for now I’ll just say that I don’t know how I feel about Background and history structure. I don’t like how you split social background over two sections. One alternative may be to have the whole thing in one section, using subheadings (pause from 1967 to 1973 etc) to lay out the basic timeline. I also agree with PMC in the DYK that the review section is too quote heavy. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 05:00, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As always your feedback is specific and actionable! tysm for this. I also wasn’t totally sold on how I split up the background/history, good to know my reservations aren’t mine alone. Feel free to drop by FAC if you have time/capacity, but even just this feedback is really useful. Appreciate you taking the time, have a great weekend 🙂 19h00s (talk) 12:21, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you’re really good at editing Italian cuisine articles. JacktheBrown (talk) 18:35, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your skill in editing articles about Italian cuisine.

JacktheBrown (talk) 19:07, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jack. And thanks for fixing all my Italian language errors, I’ll figure them out at some point. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 00:48, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, King of Chocolate! I am writing a draft on cocoa production in Japan and I was wondering if you ever came across a scholarly or print source about the exact year or decade cacao or chocolate arrived in Japan. Online blogs claim the Edo period and this article says ~1870s, which is not the Edo period. Any help would be appreciated; thank you in advance. Yue🌙 04:11, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yue! Really happy to see you here. I certainly think the 2014 Food and History article by Tatsuya Mitsuda is the best source I have seen so far on this subject, and I don’t think it is at odds with the blogs/articles you are describing. This one for instance says that chocolate arrived in the Edo period, referencing a 1797 record of chocolate in Dejima. Mitsuda 2014 mentions this on page 181: “one place through which international trade was possible was Dejima, a man‑made island near Nagasaki in the south of the country, where chocolate is mentioned in a report of 1797”. When it is talking about the 1870s, it is talking about chocolate being “produced and sold for the first time” (p 176).

Hope this helps. I am back to working on Draft:Chocolate in Japan and have some books in the mail, so I’ll let you know if anything else or better comes up. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 08:36, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Rollinginhisgrave: Thanks again for your help and the quick reply. I will just go with what I have for now then; keep me posted. Cheers! Yue🌙 23:54, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where could I find more scholarly sources about this cake? I’d like to bring it to FA status. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t see any hits in the major food journals (Food & History, Gastronomica, Petits Propos Culinaires, Appetite…). I’ll look into this for you, although annoyingly I have lost access to a cache of books when my computer broke recently. I had a good experience yesterday when I used the ask a librarian feature at the Biblioteca Nazionale Vittorio Emanuele III while researching Neapolitan ragù; I see the Austrian National Library offers the same service. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | edits) 00:44, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I’ll look what I’m able to find. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 11:52, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you’re working on chocolate in Japan. This article could be interesting to you. All I could find here in local stores are the dark and white Kit Kat. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 28 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply