Talk:Curry/Archive 1

Archive 1

Goat Curry vs. Curry Goat

It is more common to call curries "x curry" in certain parts of the Caribbean (Guyana, for example). I see a predisposition to calling it "curry x". 65.95.159.102 (talk) 06:15, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Links to recipes

it would be nice if the page had links to sources for curry recipes! maybe a recipe for curry from each country that has curry?

• Here Here! From the article here what is actually a mix of verious spices is potrayed as elemental like a root or somthing that comes form some kind of tree. This is not the case. It is not that complecated what is in these currys? And don't say currey powder.(68.83.199.209 (talk) 22:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC))

Curry not an Indian dish (?)

Curry is not an Indian dish. Many people think it is, but it is not.

Since many people think it is, you must prove it otherwise.

Let me see if I can pull this one off: Confucius was not Chinese. Many people think he was, but he was not.

Actually, it is an Indian dish, just not the types people refer to. It's this yellow lentil type sauce that is eaten with rice. It's not as widespread as it's name usage might lead you to believe, but it's still an Indian (North Indian/Pakistani, actually) dish. Admiralakbar 15:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

People of northern part of the Indian subcontinent seem to have almost as much misunderstanding about what curry is as people of the western hemisphere. Curry is not "this yellow lentil type of sauce". Curry is really a Southern Indian word for a spiced dish of vegetable, meat or both. It can be stew-like or on the drier side with sauce just covering the meat/vegetable pieces. And yes, it is traditionally eaten with rice, (but you can eat it with other things as well.) And from where did this idea that "it's not as widespread ..." has come? In Southern India, at least in Kerala, it is an everyday word, because people there eat rice and curry practically everyday. Northern Indian dishes like Rogan Josh etc. are also curries by the same defenition. 192.30.202.18 21:12, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Curry IS an Indian dish. The word "curry" is in fact Indian (in many Indian languages). Curry available in the West Indies are a result of people of Indian descent living in West Indies, such as Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago etc. India (i.e. Indian suncontinent) is an ancient civilisation and you should understand that everything has a place of origin; in this case, curry originated in the Indian subcontinent. To identify curry, it is basically Indian dishes with a runny "gravy" created using water, yogurt or coconut milk. Media Research (talk) 15:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Is curry an asiatci word, or it it a word used by the colonial English to describe what they found when they arrived in the Indian subscontinent?

The main artice seems to be insisting that it is from the Tamil 'Kari'. This seems strange since the word 'Cury' or other simialr spellings has been common in usuage in England since the midle ages. There is as much force in the arguement that Curry is an imported word as there is in the suggestion that it is an 'anglicanistaion' of a Tamil word. Why then does the main article dismiss this aletrnative with hardly a mention?

In Richard II’s reign (1377-1399) the first real English cookery book was written. Richard employed 200 cooks and they, plus others including philosophers, produced a work with 196 recipes in 1390 called ‘The Forme of Cury’. ‘Cury’ was the Old English word for cooking derived from the French ‘cuire’ - to cook, boil, grill - hence cuisine.

In the preface it says this “forme of cury was compiled of the chef maistes cokes of kyng Richard the Secunde kyng of nglond aftir the conquest; the which was accounted the best and ryallest vyand of alle csten ynges: and it was compiled by assent and avysement of maisters and phisik and of philosophie that dwellid in his court. First it techith a man to make commune pottages and commune meetis for howshold, as they shold be made, craftly and holsomly, Aftirward it techith for to make curious potages and meetes and sotiltees for alle maner of states, bothe hye and lowe. And the techyng of the forme of making of potages and of meetes, bothe flesh and of fissh, buth y sette here by noumbre and by ordre”.

So when the English merchants landed at Surat in 1608 and 1612, then Calcutta 1633, Madras 1640 and Bombay 1668, the word ‘cury’ had been part of the English language for well over two hundred years. In fact, it was noted that the meal from Emperor Jahangir’s kitchens of dumpukht fowl stewed in butter with spices, almond and raisins served to those merchants in 1612, was very similar to a recipe for English Chicken Pie in a popular cookery book of the time, ‘The English Hus-wife’ by Gevase Markham. Indeed many spices had been in Europe for hundreds of years by then, after the conquests of the Romans in 40AD and the taking of Al Andulus by the Moors in 711 AD, bringing to Europe the culinary treasures of the spice routes.

Many supporters of the Tamil word kari as the basis for curry, use the definition from the excellent Hobson-Jobson Anglo English Dictionary, first published in 1886. The book quotes a passage from the Mahavanso (c A.D. 477) which says “he partook of rice dressed in butter with its full accompaniment of curries.” The important thing, however, is the note that this is Turnour’s translation of the original Pali which used the word “supa” not the word curry. Indeed Hobson -Jobson even accepts that there is a possibility that “the kind of curry used by Europeans and Mohommedans is not of purely Indian origin, but has come down from the spiced cookery of medieval Europe and Western Asia.”

Whatever the truth, ‘curry’ was rapidly adopted in Britain. In 1747 Hannah Glasse produced the first known recipe for modern ‘currey’ in Glasse’s Art of Cookery and by 1773 at least one London Coffee House had curry on the menu. In 1791 Stephana Malcom, the grandaughter of the Laird of Craig included a curry recipe she called Chicken Topperfield plus Currypowder, Chutnies and Mulligatawny soup as recorded in ‘In The Lairds Kitchen, Three Hundred Years of Food in Scotland’.

I had hoped Wikipedia was getting to be more accurate in its entries, as it is getting a reputation for inaccuracy in some circles. Perhaps the author of this article may care to reword it and present a more balanced view of the etemology of the word? If not then perhaps Wikipedia will continue to have a mixed reception for accuracy.

It is a pity you put such effort into this note, without bothering to sign it. This is good stuff, and worthy of inclusion in the article, if it can site references and is not original research. I don't know why are are looking for the author to incorporate this viewpoint when you seem to be quite capable of doing so yourself.

I actually came looking in this discussion because I was puzzled not to find the Tamil kari origin mentioned, since that is what the Merriam-Webster dictionary cites. Apparently someone has deleted this from the article. As a common explanation for the etymology it ought to mentioned even if only to say it is wrong, or that it is disputed. As it stands, the etymology section seems oddly incomplete, talking only about various usage of the word and nothing about origins.--Ericjs (talk) 14:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

"Kari" is a Tamil word which means "spice". Tamil is a language dated back to 3rd century BCE. The claim you put forward is disputed: "In her ‘50 Great Curries of India’, Camellia Panjabi says the word today simply means ‘gravy’. She also goes for the Tamil word ‘kaari or kaaree’ as the origin, but with some reservations, noting that in the north, where the English first landed in 1608 then 1612, a gravy dish is called ‘khadi’". Etymology aside, the construction of the dish certainly lies in the Indian subcontinent. It's difficult for a country such as India to prove because of the lack of evidence - even if there's a very early evidence of the existence of the dish in another country, it shouldn't mean that the that country is its origins - it wouldn't be fair. Despite this, one thing is for sure - Indians have mastered the art of making curry!

Etymology of the word curry

Is curry an Asiatic word, or is it a word used by the colonial English to describe what they found when they arrived in the Indian subcontinent? The main article seems to be insisting that it is from the Tamil 'Kari'. This seems strange since the word 'Cury' or other similar spellings has been common in usage in England since the middle ages. There is as much force in the argument that Curry is an imported word as there is in the suggestion that it is an 'anglicisation' of a Tamil word. Why then does the main article dismiss this alternative with hardly a mention? In Richard II’s reign (1377-1399) the first real English cookery book was written. Richard employed 200 cooks and they, plus others including philosophers, produced a work with 196 recipes in 1390 called ‘The Forme of Cury’. ‘Cury’ was the Old English word for cooking derived from the French ‘cuire’ - to cook, boil, grill - hence cuisine. In the preface it says this “forme of cury was compiled of the chef maistes cokes of kyng Richard the Secunde kyng of nglond aftir the conquest; the which was accounted the best and ryallest vyand of alle csten ynges: and it was compiled by assent and avysement of maisters and phisik and of philosophie that dwellid in his court. First it techith a man to make commune pottages and commune meetis for howshold, as they shold be made, craftly and holsomly, Aftirward it techith for to make curious potages and meetes and sotiltees for alle maner of states, bothe hye and lowe. And the techyng of the forme of making of potages and of meetes, bothe flesh and of fissh, buth y sette here by noumbre and by ordre”. So when the English merchants landed at Surat in 1608 and 1612, then Calcutta 1633, Madras 1640 and Bombay 1668, the word ‘cury’ had been part of the English language for well over two hundred years. In fact, it was noted that the meal from Emperor Jahangir’s kitchens of dumpukht fowl stewed in butter with spices, almond and raisins served to those merchants in 1612, was very similar to a recipe for English Chicken Pie in a popular cookery book of the time, ‘The English Hus-wife’ by Gevase Markham. Indeed many spices had been in Europe for hundreds of years by then, after the conquests of the Romans in 40AD and the taking of Al Andulus by the Moors in 711 AD, bringing to Europe the culinary treasures of the spice routes. Many supporters of the Tamil word kari as the basis for curry, use the definition from the excellent Hobson-Jobson Anglo English Dictionary, first published in 1886. The book quotes a passage from the Mahavanso (c A.D. 477) which says “he partook of rice dressed in butter with its full accompaniment of curries.” The important thing, however, is the note that this is Turnour’s translation of the original Pali which used the word “supa” not the word curry. Indeed Hobson -Jobson even accepts that there is a possibility that “the kind of curry used by Europeans and Mohommedans is not of purely Indian origin, but has come down from the spiced cookery of medieval Europe and Western Asia.” Whatever the truth, ‘curry’ was rapidly adopted in Britain. In 1747 Hannah Glasse produced the first known recipe for modern ‘currey’ in Glasse’s Art of Cookery and by 1773 at least one London Coffee House had curry on the menu. In 1791 Stephana Malcom, the grandaughter of the Laird of Craig included a curry recipe she called Chicken Topperfield plus Currypowder, Chutnies and Mulligatawny soup as recorded in ‘In The Lairds Kitchen, Three Hundred Years of Food in Scotland’. I had hoped Wikipedia was getting to be more accurate in its entries, as it is getting a reputation for inaccuracy in some circles. Perhaps the author of this article may care to reword it and present a more balanced view of the etemology of the word? If not then perhaps Wikipedia will continue to have a mixed reception for accuracy.

You seem to think that the history of India starts from the time the Europeans landed in India. The history of India is supposed to start from 4th Century B.C. But the fact is Europeans do not trust Indian sources but they trust the worst European sources. It is ridiculous that Indian History is based on Alexander's conquest whose history is based on a story in the 2nd Century which is based on a story a couple of centuries earlier which was written after Alexander was killed. You just have to read the chapter on India to understand the authenticity of these sources. Gold digging ants etc..

FYI Indians were trading spices, precious stones , cotton, colors etc with Sumeria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, Rome, china etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.67.103 (talk) 00:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Traditionally around the world meat is always barbecued. Just like all the clothing is traditionally from animals, leather or wool. It was Indians who first cooked meat with various ingredients. Just like Indians were the first to make cloth from non-animal source. The Sumerians called the Indian cloth "vegetable cloth". India might be poor now but until the 17th/18th century it was the richest after that it still had the riches but it belonged to British now and it was counted as British wealth.

Rendang

I would not describe "rendang" as a kind of curry. Rendang is a pure meat-dish, with no vegetables. Sure, people eat it with vegetables on the side (and of course rice) but they are cooked seperately. MartijnL 09:59, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

As the article suggests, "Curry" is a broadly used term and the inclusion or exclusion of vegetables would certainly not prevent a dish being given the name. A standard curry ordered in many restaurants will often only have meat in it and the characteristics of and ingredients in Rendang would mean it is fairly described as a curry. Dainamo 23:04, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I agree with MartijnL. Rendang is not a curry. It is a dish associated with the Malay and Sumatran people. I wonder if they add galangal to their curry or pounded roasted coconut slivers for that matter. Rendang is slowly cooked in coconut milk and spices until almost all the liquid is gone, leaving the meat coated in the spicy condiments. The 'curry' is more watery. There are many versions of rendang - none have any vegetables in them. There are many versions of 'curry' - some like the Malaysian one have potatoes, brinjals or other veggie in them. But actually do we care? If the rendang or curry is delicious, it would be beyond labels, names and words.

Bangladeshi owned but still Indian cuisine

There is no need for "Indian". Those restaurents may be Bangladeshi owned but they serve Indian food. Bengali food differs significantly from other varities in Indian subcontinent. If an Englishman owns an Indian Curry house would u call it an English Curry House this logic sounds stupid...

Most indian dishes are in fact vegetarian, and what we in the UK eat is our own version or that of the restaurant owners here. Vindaloo is originally a pork dish ate by the Christian Indians in Goa (origianlly from a Portuguese dish) but I doubt you have seen this in an Indian restaurant in Britian, precisely because a moslem from Bangladesh wouldm't use pork and most British people would not expect it due to year of their version being served here. Dainamo 16:49, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup by Qwghlm

I've done a bit of cleanup to the article (particularly the British section) as there was a lot of repetition and 'lost' sentences within it... hopefully it's better now. Qwghlm 01:38, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

How is Indian curry eaten?

I recently went to an Indian restaurant that had several types of curry available as part of their buffet. Some of them were the kind of thing you could pick up with a spoon and eat, like chicken curries, but others just appeared to be curry sauce with nothing in them. I'm guessing you eat it with bread?

It depends on the regional tradition of the restaurant, assuming it was a fairly decent place. See my comments below regarding bread. I might suggest, though, that it being a buffet, someone might have gotten there before you and filched the last of the meat, just leaving the sauce? :) Tarquin Binary 10:47, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

simple you put the food in your gob.. i dont think you stick it in your earhole or snort it 82.24.168.34 21:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Why do the british like curry?

was just wondering why the british like curry? - liz

The short answer is 'what's not to like?'. The historical answer is 'The Raj' (it's not a modern phenomenon, 19th-century British cookbooks are replete with curry recipes). The association goes right back to the days of the East India Company when the merchants acquired a great fondness for the taste of the Indian food of the time (which, by all accounts was a bit different from that now - for one thing use of chilis, introduced into India by the Europeans in the first place, was not as widespread). It has been suggested that this was not due to its exoticism but its familiarity to aristocratic or middle-class British pallets. For some while, the British had been importing spices and using them in a wide range of dishes, even desserts (the craving for spice was, of course, one of the initial driving forces behind imperialism.), but they were pretty expensive in Britain, not your working-class fare. But when you got to India you could nosh up all you wanted even if you were some minor factor or clerk. So they brought more spices, tastes and recipes home with them, trade and the Raj helped to drop the price, and here we are now. Tarquin Binary 10:26, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Masala inaccuracy

This line is incorrect as currently written: In India, Masala is a spice of its own and is a reddish colored powder added to curries.

The word masala simply means "spice" or "spices" - in this way, it's similar to the word "curry": much like various curries are called "<insert main ingredient or place of origin here> curry," various spices are called "<insert primary usage, dominating ingredient or place of origin here> masala."

I believe the intent of this line's author was to make a reference to garam masala.

-rhrad

Garam Masala isn't red - sounds more like either chilli powder or food-colouring. Either way the description of it as 'Masala' isn't accurate. Sikandarji 05:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

How to eat

I've never been quite certain myself what the normal procedure is to eat curry. Apparently with curry in Indian cuisine, it is common to use naan to scoop up the curry. But what about in Thai and other South Asian cuisines? Theshibboleth 02:00, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

It's not even generally true about naan in Indian cuisine. (Probably because there is no such thing as Indian cuisine. It's a big sub-continent, so there are many regional cuisines. All one can generalise about is that the use of spices is generally more predominant than in the European tradition.) Anyway, the use of bread as opposed to rice originates, unsurprisingly, in North India and Kashmir, where wheat is the dominant source of carbohydrate, hence the Balti style of cooking (admittedly authenticity disputed, but thought to have been devised by northern Indians anyway) where the dish is served freshly in its own cooking bowl and mopped up with naan, parathas or other bread. Bangladesh is a rice-growing region, as is South India in general, so rice is the normal accompaniment.

I would say that rice or roti/chappati are the main staple the "curry" is what the accompaniment to these. In some parts of India at times very poor people eat very roughly made roti/chappati with raw onion or a hand full of channa dal fired in a tea spoon of oil with whole red chillies. Indian food usually revolves around the staples of cooked rice or rotis(mostly wheat but at times corn or Millets like Bajra, Jowar ragi) and at times other staples like Ragi. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pervez87 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

WRT Thailand , Malaysia etc are rice-growing regions - say no more. The same variations occur in Chinese cuisine too, wheat is the dominant crop of a large part of China.

In practice in the UK, it is common to supplement the rice with a couple of naans, chapatis or parathas on the side, because we mix and match things like that. Depends how hungry you feel, of course. Tarquin Binary 10:14, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

This is a little late but I'll offer what I know anyway. I'm most familiar with northern Indian cuisine where breads are more common than rice. And yes, with those you do rip off a piece of the bread and use it to scoop up some of the curry or the vegetable, etc. Often you also take a small bit of pickle with each bite, or some chutney, but it depends on the specfic dish as to which pickle goes best with it, and tastes vary. Then for South Indian dishes with rice I always put the different "curries" next to my rice and eat it with a fork so that I can eat a few different dishes at the same time with one pile of rice. I don't however happen to spend much time with South Indian people and I don't know if that's the "right" way to do it. A good way if you're unsure is to simply ask the servers what's the best way to do it. Our article is still a little off, because even the base sauce that is mixed with the meat and/or vegetables in North Indian cuisine is often called a curry by cooks because that is the commonly known term. For example a recipe for matar paneer will have a section explaining how to make the paneer, then how to make the curry and then how to finish off the dish. This article os not terribly well organized because the term itself has such overlapping and different uses. - Taxman ^Talk 18:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

British Curry

Sorry, that first para seemed to be describing the 1950s-60s. I do not know anyone who uses anything further down the food chain than Pathak's when prepping a curry - and if you have guests, fresh preparation is de rigeur. Powder? No way. And that's home cooking. People have also learned to value particular restaurants for the freshness of their preparation. As for describing a curry as requiring the meat or veg to be initially coated with powder, this wasn't even true when British curry was rubbish - except for the appalling Coronation Chicken of course, but this was often served as chicken sprinkled with uncooked curry powder. Shudder. There's a lot more to say about the interaction between British and Indian cooking too. Never figured out why every curry had to have sultanas in it though - Vesta deserves a special mention here... Finally, I'm not certain that the majority of British 'curry houses' are Bangladeshi-run, though I have no stats to refute this. Certainly it is true in the East End, where I live, but I think there is much variation across the UK. For example Balti was first invented - or popularised - in Birmingham by northern Indians. It's not a Bangladeshi cooking method, though it was widely emulated with varying degrees of success by restaurants down here. Southall in West London is dominated by a variety of Indian cuisines (in the strict sense) because the locals are Hindus from areas of India.Tarquin Binary 09:52, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Bangladeshi still the dominant force, but less so now in parts of London and the further one north goes. See edit and citation in article. Dainamo 16:52, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Indian cuisine

Further to my comments above, I'd suggest a more comprehensive list of Indian sub-continental variations. Doesn't have to be too long, but the variations are important. Just a few notes on dominant themes (use of dairy produce in Punjabi cuisine, Goan seafood, more ginger to the south etc etc). May have a go when I have time. Tarquin Binary 10:41, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Rogan Josh

I am not an expert about Curry and everything I know about Rogan Josh I learned within the past hour or two from the Wikipedia article about it (Rogan Josh) and by searching the internet.

This (Curry) article says British curries are generally arranged by strengths, with the following being commonly found examples of these, one of which is Rogan Josh. As best as I understand what Rogan Josh is, it is not a Curry. I see in a previous discussion that Rogan Josh is included due to being in a list (of 50) in a book. Perhaps the book is misleading.

I would argue that it is a curry, if that is the local consensus. Otherwise it isn't :) I have a great fondness for Rogan Josh, and I would say that it certainly has more claim on 'currydom' than, say, a korma. But 'curry' is just a really vague term, I'm afraid (see below). Tarquin Binary 22:03, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Sure it is a curry! I have eaten curries all my life, and Rogan Josh sure does taste like one. Here's a random external link that I found to a Rogan Josh recipe that may help convince you - Rogan Josh (Lamb Curry). --Aravinda100 18:23, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Is Curry a dish or a spice?

I am not an expert about Curry but I have always thought that Curry is a spice, not a dish. When I go to the grocery store, there is always a Curry spice.

I know that Curry is actually a combinaton of spices and that there are many various combinations of spices that are called Curry but it seems to me that defining Curry as a dish is very confusing. Perhaps it is relatively common to call Curry a dish, but if this is technically incorrect then it seems wrong for the confusion to be perpetuated by the Wikipedia.

I especially think that the typical ingredients of a Curry spice should be described early in the article. Descriptions of ingredients such as meats in a Curry dish seem especially confusing.

The problem is that it is hard to be technically incorrect - or correct - when dealing with such a vague term as 'curry'. I would argue that it isn't even a dish, spice or a combination of spices, just a vague portmanteau term covering a range of styles of south, south-east and east Asian cooking. As noted in the article there are Thai, Vietnamese etc curries. In a specific cultural context, though, people may have a consensus as to what they mean by the term. For example, in London, for many people, a 'curry' is simply what you get when you order a meal in a 'curry house' or Indian restaurant/takeaway. Of course 'curry house' is defined as being a place where you can get a curry :) To which confusion add that 'Indian' is often used as a generic term for any south Asian restaurant.

In a south Asian context, the spice combination is usually known as a masala, and there is a specific spice (or should that be 'herb'?) called curry leaves, but this is actually not necessarily a usual component of south Asian curries. I agree about the common components, (though these are not invariable), I would (for south Asia) list garlic, onions, chillis, coriander and cumin as extremely common. Turmeric (effectively more of a colourant) is common too, though I tend to prefer to use paprika. Tarquin Binary 21:58, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

First, let me emphasize that I am a beginner to Wikipedia also, so if I am doing this differently than what is typical, I am sorry.

Can a Curry dish exist without a spice (or spices) called Curry?

Sam Hobbs 23:50, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Don't worry - in terms of Wikipedia, you are doing fine, Sam - it's all about discussion and consensus. Beginner status didn't show - and frankly I haven't been here long myself.

Anyway, apart from the curry leaves that I mentioned, which are not a common ingredient (they are also cited in the article, by the way), there is no spice called curry. Curry is sometimes applied to a spice blend, but this is proprietary or even spontaneously individual - there is no canonical blend. As I say, the correct term for a spice blend arrived at when cooking is a 'masala'. A preprocessed paste or powder may be called a 'curry paste' or 'curry powder', but this is hugely generic, there is no exact composition that can be arrived at. For example, since Rogan Josh was discussed above, Pathak's, who are among the better of the off-the-shelf brands, do not do a 'curry paste'. They do, however have, among many other choices, a 'Rogan Josh mix' ('mix' IIRC - have to go up to shop and check to be sure of the exact last word). What I'm getting at is that 'curry' is an amazingly vague generic term, only properly defined by local consensus, impossible to closedown on a global source like Wikipedia. Tarquin Binary 00:41, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Merge Japanese Curry?

Merge! But only if the dish is made with real Japanese.-- User:Bhudda

I saw the notification to merge Japanese Curry to the general Curry page. I do not think it is appropriate though since Japanese curry, though a curry, is distinct and a fully absorbed type of cuisine that is not very similar to other types of curry anymore.--Bud 06:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Do not merge. Curry in Japan has evolved independently from other areas of the world. Where else in the world do you find curry roux, curry udon, and curry bread?--Endroit 17:58, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Do not merge, distinct and historically unique. And making me hungry all of a sudden. Chris 18:21, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Do not merge. sounds like the tag should be removed. it was added by this edit: "19:08, 20 November 2005 Nlu ({{mergefrom}})" but the person hasn't bothered to make an argument. --Tokek 04:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Do not merge. Japanese curry is in a category all its own, particularly with the recent "soup curry" craze.~—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.202.108.30 (talk • contribs) .

Do not merge. You don't see mention of turmeric or curcumin in the Jap curry, so don't merge them.

Paul A'Barge

I guess Jagged 85 merged Japanese curry already without concensus. I'll ask him to read this discussion.--Endroit 02:33, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

He don't seem to be big on consensus, he apparently unilaterally decided that all British curries were Bangladeshi and tried to change the sub-head as a side-swipe. Tarquin Binary 02:41, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Jagged 85. Looks good now.--Endroit 03:00, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Um, say again? Tarquin Binary 03:02, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Correction... The Japanese curry page looks good. The Curry page may need some work.--Endroit 03:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Ah. You see, I don't care one way or the other about the status of Japanese Curry (although I obviously regard it as excellent, I have no opinions as to its classification, taxonomy or history) - it's that sub-head change with regard to British cuisine that annoyed me, that ignores history entirely...Tarquin Binary 03:02, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

This is the Merge Japanese Curry section, isn't it not? Regarding the category of Curry, my understanding was that it is "Indian", because it is from the Indian subcontinent. I'm sorry if I'm mistaken.--Endroit 03:16, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, sorry Tarquin Binary, I have an opinion now. Curry in Britain should be called "British cuisine". Curry in Bangladesh should be "Bangladesh cuisine", if that merits its own section. Otherwise, British curry should be considered "British cuisine", not "British/Bangladesh cuisine.--Endroit 03:29, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Curses. I had a fairly vitriolic reply already typed for you and ready to go. You blooming well defused it :) But, yes, I agree. The problem is that British curry or cuisine is a sort of cultural fusion, not totally confined to Asian people or people of Asian descent - it isn't even a restaurant thing. Non-Asian people in the UK have incorporated 'curries' into their home cuisine for a long time, even though these have been hugely modified from what would be regarded as a 'real' dish in a specific province of South Asia. It gets complex.Tarquin Binary 03:38, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and I think the big 'bucket of chicken curry' picture (yuk!) at the top of the page sucks, and I will try to find something better that does justice to my (for one) favourite food term. Tarquin Binary 03:42, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Endroit - I've restored the Japanese curry page, and also kept a brief description of Japanese curry in this page but added a Main article link to Japanese curry for the full article. Also, curry is not just limited to the original South Asian variants but can also refer to all the foreign variants. I personally don't see how Japanese curry can be that different from the other types of curry that it can't be called "curry" anymore (I'm sure African or Carribean curry must be just as different) but I don't have any problems with having a seperate Japanese curry page aswell. Jagged 85 04:01, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Tarquin Binary - I admit I made a mistake by adding Bangladeshi in the heading and I apologize for it. However, the reason why I did that was because a large bulk of British curry was directly influenced by Bangladeshi curry. Over 65% of British curry restaurants in 2003 was Bangladeshi and before that, the figure was even higher. Even the earliest forms of British curry came from the Bengal (the first region of South Asia the British had conquered). Other parts of the subcontinent have also contributed to British curry, so I agree that its not quite the same as Bangladeshi curry anymore, but at least it deserves more credit for it don't you think? (I also think the term "Indian restaurants" is very misleading) If you don't agree, then I don't mind leaving the British curry section as it is. Maybe it might be better if a seperate Bangladeshi section is added instead. Jagged 85 04:01, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I would describe British 'curry' as a culinary phenomenon, and worth a separate description, given its influence on UK cuisine from the 19th (even 18th) century onwards. The historical commentators I have read have in no way suggested that these influences have all come from Bengal (many, and I can understand this (as a cook who knows where things grow) have come from Madras and other places in south India, not to speak of Kashmir and the Punjab in the north). It would be foolish, on the other hand, to suggest that the majority of new 'Indian' restaurant proprietors in the UK since the 1970s have not been Bangladeshi (and, by the way, this growth has been an excellent thing, in my opinion). But, surely, that point has been made in the article... Tarquin Binary 04:33, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Thai Curry

I've been making some Thai curries recently and have been generally satisfied with the results, but also believe that I can do better. I have basically been following the directions on the curry paste package. I start by warming some of the coconut milk, adding a generous portion of paste, cooking and stirring until the paste is blended, and then adding the rest of the milk and some water. Almost as much water as coconut milk is what a Thai woman at the Asian grocery suggested. Then I add the tofu and steamed vegetables and serve over rice. It tastes great, but I've had better at Thai restaraunts. I know some people add tamarind juice, and some add fish sauce, but I haven't tried these yet. Anyone have any ideas for fine tuning my curry? Your advice is appreciated.

Not exactly Authentic Thai Curry but I can provide some information on how cambodians cook curry. First sautee julienned onions and shrimp paste to braise meat. Add sugar and salt to the meat. Add the coconut milk and curry paste (fresh or not) and water to the pot. Let simmer until meat is tender. Take the pot of curry off the heat and start adding rough chopped sweet potatoes, string beans. If you use beef instead of chicken, omit the potatoes and string bean and use peanuts. Good luck Trilinguist 22:17, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

"Finding good Indian food in Britain"

Should this section really be on the page? Is it not just people's opinions of what is or isn't good? I'm sure pretty much every curry house in the country has people that like and dislike it. What do other people think? King rich 23:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

That's more something for Wikitravel than this page, I should think. - RW 63.21.55.118 01:30, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it seems misplaced --belg4mit 18.124.2.224 21:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

As there is some agreement I will remove it then. If anyone wants to dispute this then please say so here before reverting. King rich 00:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

NPOV

A lot of the british curry section reads like a magAzine article. I personAlly think the list of plACes one caN find a 'good curry' should go. externAL links caN be provided to such lists, but this isn't the plACe for recommendations, especiaLly as it's open to commercial abuse. aPipedreambomb 06:55, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Curry hotness

Could someone please compile a list of curries in order of "hotness"? Thanks 86.141.165.147 15:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

There's no such thing. Different cooks will cook the same dish at different levels of spiciness. Peppers vary in their capsaicin content and size, so even using the same number of peppers would not reasonably distinguish how hot a curry is. So short answer, I don't see how that would be possible or useful. - Taxman ^Talk 19:24, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Section Order

It's clear that the different cultural sections in this article are not in order of importance, but just placed according to the self-importance of whomever added a given section. But rather than trying to organize it by importance -- which I think would start with India, then Thailand, Britain, and Pakistan, for example -- and thus causing a permanant argument, I think we should probably just sort them alphabetically. Certainly the current, arbitrary order is not in any way helpful, and could create false impressions of being ordered by importance.--Kaz 19:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Straying into Cultural Cuisine Topics

is it just me, or does this article need major restructuring? This page should be about curry, not the various cuisines that have "curry," which is a misnomer anyway. There's far too much information on the background and basis of different cuisines, when the article should be focusing specifically on the curries. For example, why do we need to know that there are two forms of Bengali cuisine? That has no relevance to the article at hand. It should also be clear what the one Indian dish called curry by Indians actually IS (i.e. the yellow yogurt/lentil sauce-type thing that's eaten with rice). This article further perpetuates the incorrect, colloquial and European usage of the word curry. While obviously this should be discussed, there should be a clear distinction between what the Indian usage is, and the common English usage is. Admiralakbar 15:27, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The more I look at this article, the more I'm convinced it needs major cleanup. It has become basically a "list of Asian cuisines." The Punjabi section, in particular, goes into a non- sequitur about kabobs and the usage of wheat as compared to rice, both things that refer to Punjabi cuisine, not curry. Nearly every cultural subsection has an excessively long description of the food in general, when the link to the specific cultural cuisine page would suffice. By adding general information about things besides curry, this page even further muddies the definition of curry, which is exactly the kind of thing Wikipedia is not to do. I'm going to look at paring down some of the cultural sections. Admiralakbar 15:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The mention of wheat in the Punjabi section might be relevant if curry is eaten with wheat there rather than rice, as being eaten with rice seems to be one of the distinguishing characteristics of curry. But it's not clear that this is what it is saying as it does not ever mention curry. These cuisine sections which don't mention curry might have to do with the excessively broad definition of curry at the beginning of this article which seems to make anything with a sauce a curry, covering most Indian dishes. I'm tempted to delete each section that does not mention curry, but I'm not familiar enough with the regional cuisines of India to do so properly--someone who knows what is actually relevant to curry in each cuisine ought to make some such edits. Also, hasn't anyone ever noticed that all these cuisine subsections are part of the etymology section? I'll at least fix that. --Ericjs (talk) 15:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

NPOV on British section

This section makes a lot of downright scathing generalisations that aren't even cited. Someone knowledgable on the matter seriously needs to rewrite it and stick to the fucking facts.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.243.23.213 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC).

I take it this is the sort of thing you're getting at:

“ In contrast, the typical provincial "curry house" serves a (to the Asian mind at any rate)curious and almost ritualised cuisine which bears little resemblance to any real Asian dishes. This type of establishment is often stereotyped as having generally absymal levels of hygiene, being deserted for most of the day and relying heavily on the custom of hordes of drunks emerging from the surrounding pubs at closing time. ”

Personally, I assume it was probably meant to be lighthearted but it's nontheless rather unencyclopaedic and should probably be removed altogether. But I'll leave that decision to someone else, it's late!
—Chris (blather • contribs) 00:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

"The popularity of curry in the UK encouraged the growth of Indian restaurants." this sentence is the wrong way round in my opinion. Good job whoever citation-tagged it!BaseTurnComplete 17:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Reference needed on JMSDF curry friday claim

Could the writer provide a source on this interesting tidbit? Since the JMSDF have multiple bases all around japan, I really don't think the navy need to go out of its way to synchronize the lunch menus. Just my two cents 74.99.18.250 22:15, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Faal?

Anyone have any insight on Faal curry(super hot curry)? I know it's not a traditional curry, but I was unable to find out anything about it all on wikipedia.

NVM I see it's also spelled Phaal. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.95.168.211 (talk) 23:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

If it is Phaal, (It is not a english term ie this Phal, It may or may not be the Faal you are reffering to). I have only come across Phaal in Bangalore and not as a gravy dish(as I understand when referring to Curry). It is thin slices of marbled beef marinated in super hot spices (mainly chilli powder I think)and grilled on charcoal grill. I came across Phaal Curry in a resturant in LA which was a super hot dish with thin beef slices in a unidentifiable gravy. Incidently the owner was from Bangalore but he was trying to pass of as a Hyderabadi(a city in South India) serving authentic Hyderabadi cusine!!!! Pervez87 01:39, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Americans and Curry

As someone in America who has never eaten curry and have heard very little about it, this wiki does not explain what curry tastes like as opposed to other traditional American foods, such as "baked chicken with rice", etc. I am not sure whether to try curry after reading this article. Perhaps users might consider adding information about how curry compares to several key "comparison" foods, like:

chicken with rice chicken fried rice (the dish in the wiki's image looks similar to chicken fried rice (white rice-looking dish)) etc etc

many thanks!

150.135.185.29 10:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

That would be near impossible for two reasons. One, there's no equivalent to curry in other dishes. And two, there's a an amazingly wide range of different kinds of curry which have a very disparate set of flavours. If you want to know what something tastes like, TRY IT! ;) --Monotonehell 13:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

It is like asking what is french cusine taste like Pervez87 00:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Hot ?

"The use of hot spices was not mentioned, which reflected the limited use of chili in India "

The preceding statement is very strange, there are "hot" spice ingredients other than chilli (peppers).Eregli bob 06:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

UK Lager

"Lager is a popular accompaniment to curry, particularly in the United Kingdom "

Should we mention that the lager is usually the Cobra brand at virtually every UK curry house and Tiger brand at virtually every chinese sit-in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.216.130 (talk) 16:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Can we wait a paragraph before contradicting ourselves?

"The term curry is most likely an anglicized name for the Kari derived from the usage of "Kari" in the South Indian language Tamil to connotate any secondary dish eaten with rice.[1] In addition, curry leaves, known by the Tamil word 'Karuvapillai' (literally meaning black leaf) which is an aberration of 'kari-veppilai' in Tamiil or 'kari-veppila' in Malayalam or the Kannada word 'Karibevu' is used in various kinds of dishes common in South India made with vegetables or meat and usually eaten with rice.[1] The term curry (meaning a stew) was found in English before the arrival of British traders on the Subcontinent, and may simply have been applied by them to dishes which they thought resembled the stews they were used to. "

So, which is it going to be? From Kari, from Karuvapillai, or always been and English word for 'stew'? Asserting tat all three are true doesn't bloody work. BUT if the word 'Curry' REALLY WAS found in English before traders arrived on the subcontinent, the former two really *can't* be true. 75.61.91.172 16:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I notice the last claim is unsourced, whereas the previous two have sources. Geoff B 16:55, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

For one thing this is not a contradiction. Note the use of the words "may" and "most likely". This paragraph describes some possibilities of the etymology, because no one knows with certainty. And actually both can be true. The English confronted with the Tamil dish might well have been influenced by both the word "kari" and their possibly vague familiarity with the word "curry" as a food term in Enlish (which might have been archaic at the time). Or someone might have been told the word 'kari' for the dish and simply heard it as the similar word they were familiar with 'curry'. Language development is generally not a precise thing. --Ericjs (talk) 14:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

tikka masala on intercity trains

It is now available (albeit in frozen, microwavable form) on Intercity rail trains, as a flavour for crisps, and even as a pizza topping.

InterCity anything hasn't existed for a long time in the UK. If someone can find a verifiable version of this fact to replace the above it would be cool, but I doubt it's possible 87.113.2.251 18:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

It's on the [| Virgin Train's First Class menu], there's even a curry club on Wednesdays. As it's First Class it's probably not frozen, but I don't know.

I don't think standard class meals are very common any more, they've been replaced with a buffet car selling sandwiches etc. ƕ (talk) 15:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Ketchup?

What is this doing under the article for curry?

"...the origin of the word "Curry". Other Asian sauces such as "Ketchup" (the etymological origin of the word is likely Asian despite the western conventions of this sauce)"

Yay! The etymological origin of ketchup belongs under the article for ketchup, doesn't it? Given that ketchup is based on a Chinese fish sauce, I'd reckon it has pretty much nothing to do with an article on curry, which is a basically Indian cuisine (note the spelling everyone).

Standard disclaimer: I will not even read responses, nor will I "sign" this comment. I do not respond to calls to "edit it myself". I am a user of Wikipedia. I proclaim my right to comment on articles without editing them myself. If you want to put the onus on me, you are, yet again, limiting the potential reach of Wikipedia beyond those whom have time to waste arguing about this crap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.35.62.251 (talk) 05:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

What are the must haves

As a cook that has never had to work with curry, im a bit lost...

Is there any thing that has to go in to the mix to make it a curry? like onion or garlic or somthing like that? I mean what makes it a curry and not just some hot dish?(DarcaTheCook (talk) 08:28, 3 July 2008 (UTC))

Tea is drunk with curry?

I think this line

           " Tea is popularly drunk with curry" does not make any sense

Tea is never drunk with an Indian meal...not in India at least

Lassi is drunk wit hbreakfast or simply alone. It is unaccustomed to drink any beverage with curries at all. I mean the popular drink is water. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.102.164.60 (talk) 15:09, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I know a lot of people who drink milk with curry, to sooth the burning. 79.66.61.246 (talk) 19:29, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Health Benefits

I'm sorry, but given the fact that this article describes curries as being extremely diverse and identifies no ingredient that a curry must have to be a curry, this sections is rather useless and silly. It might as well say "curries have health benefits to the degree to which they contain ingredients that have health benefits". Perhaps the studies that the writer had in mind were focussing on the typical yellow curry powder found in western grocery stores (at least in the U.S. and UK), perhaps particularly on the turmeric. If so, then this section ought to say that.--Ericjs (talk) 14:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

You could even say the opposite to 'health benefits'. These curry sauces feel to burn your mouth, am I right? What is it that actually makes it do that? I very much doubt eating spicy food like this could possibly be good for your tounge, mouth, digestive system or gastrointestinal tract. But there doesn't seem to be any mention of it in the article. 79.66.61.246 (talk) 19:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Curry herb

A friend of mine recently bought an herb plant that was reportedly labeled "curry." It resembles a rosemary plant. This doesn't sound like a curry tree. Any ideas what this could be?

Actually, I just answered my question with a little web research. From http://www.nhg.com/db/1078.htm

CURRY PLANT Helichrysum italiacum

Tender Perennial Ht: 1' - 2' Light: Full Sun Soil: Well Drained Soil Color: Yellow Symbolism:

Tender Perennial Culinary Ornamental

Related to the strawflower, it bears attractive golden yellow flowers.

It is popular for its curry scented foliage. Great container plant. Likes hot dry conditions. The English use this herb in cream cheese for sandwiches and in salads egg and chicken).

This is not the commercial source of curry powder.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.188.33.221 (talk) 20:39, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Pashtun/Afghani Cuisine

Heyy, so it looks to me, after having looked after this page for a while, that the cultural cuisines section is becoming more relevant to curry directly, as to before where it simply described generally, the cuisine. There are still some issues with this, but the one I wanted to address was the Pashtun cuisine section... It essentially says that the Pashtun diet consists of fruits, nuts, and wheats. I'm not Pashtun myself, but I can assume one of two things: 1) These items are put into currys into Pashtun cuisine. 2.) They are eaten individually, in a non-curried form. I'm guessing it's the first, but from the current wording, it kind of just sounds like Pashtun food just consists of raw foods, rather than describing what goes into their food. If someone who has knowledge on this subject could rearrange the wording, it'd be much appreciated. As it stands, that section doesn't actually have any direct ties to the subject at hand. Admiralakbar (talk) 03:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Needs disambiguation

The introduction to the article says "This article is on a general variety of spicy dishes". But in English, "curry" has at least two significantly different meanings. One of them is indeed, "a general variety of spicy dishes". But the other use of "curry" refers to the spice or seasoning itself.

In supermarkets all over the US, and even in the local Indian grocers around here (northeast US), you can buy "curry" in the form of jars or bags of powder. These powders are a mixture of different spices such as turmeric, cardamon, cumin, etc, and are used for seasoning all sorts of other foods.

I think some disambiguation needs to be added to acknowledge this other common use of the term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plnelsonwiki (talk • contribs) 16:12, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that should be noted as a misconception in the article. "Curry" is not a spice or a mixture of spices, contrary to what many American products advertise and many people here seem to think. 24.184.166.238 (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2009 (UTC)Neel

'Curry' is called 'Salan' in Ordou Language

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.181.167.165 (talk) 14:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Curry comes from a Tamil word khari? According to what?

Is this really true? The article doesn't even a real reference. Since the British were based in Bengal, I would imagine they got the world from their word in Bengali, thorcurry (thor-kaah-ree). You basically drop the "thor" and get the Anglicized version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.162.84.24 (talk) 01:49, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

It's derived from Tamil, according to Oxford, Merriam-Webster and the American Heritage Dictionary, among others.--118.173.164.116 (talk) 10:35, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Curry in North India and Pakistan

I have clarified this with references. Curry is used as just another word for Tari in North India and Pakistan. Tari means a wet dish of any kind. So, if you cook meat only in Yoghurt and salt without any spices of any kind (which is sometimes done with things like Yakhni), this is a tari dish in Hindi-Urdu. And in English North Indian and Pakistani people will simply call the juice curry. Any British stew or Japanese udon will similarly be called a curry dish by North Indians and Pakistanis (unless they live in Britain and understand local usage), simply because it is wet. This is purely an accidental thing because curry happens to sound so much like tari that people assume it must be the English word for the same thing. --Cookmughlai (talk) 07:23, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Urdu , An "official language of North India" ?...

It is Hindi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.61.7.71 (talk) 04:08, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism / Protection proposal

I see a surprising lot of vandalism on this article. Strange.

Because the vandalism is mainly done from IPs, a half-protected site, editable only by users with registration since days, will help and is proposed by me. Wispanow (talk) 16:51, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

A few of the recent edits termed as vandalism were actually quite funny. I had a good laugh. But it has now gotten out-of-hand. It's time to protect the page from anonomous IP users. --@Efrat (talk) 06:22, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Indian subcontinent .

Do not understand what is Indian subcontinent mean to the writer.politicaly Indian subcontinent is compared to Indian,Pakistan,shrilanka,Bangladesh and napal.In curry section all the Indian state curry food is mention,Bangladesh west Bengal and orrisa is mention in onE SECTION as they have same kind of food.As we undarstand the writer is trying to discribe the same food culture as indin pakistan and Bangladesh have commen culture.But what is strange THAT Pakistan is mention here in a diffract section. why so, north Indian food and Punjabi food is their again Pakistan FOOD for what.so I am deleting it.pakistan has a long history from all the westan part of world like the persian,greek,turk,all the central asian and arab,in ancient time from the Aryan scythian the persian medas,irani people.pakistan is a central asian country colse to modern day indian.as told by pakistani historian.so plz do not mention pakistan in enything which is indian food culture launage ot enything their is other section for it.Hope the british writer and the english scholar will give attention to our concern.--59.162.59.66 (talk) 13:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Not strange at all. You are being far too nationalistic, I suspect. Anyway, I have explained the term now. Please do not delete the section again. - Sitush (talk) 13:38, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Bunny Chow

Perhaps someone more wiki-savvy than me can make a note of curry in South Africa, and create a link to the wikipedia article on 'Bunny Chow', a ubiquitous convenience food in Durban, KwaZulu/Natal. I am not South African, and I think it would be best if the person writing the article had a deeper knowledge of the subject. 78.144.213.140 (talk) 17:21, 24 December 2011 (UTC)granthamguy, 24 December 2011, 1719 UTC.

That's the first thing I thought of when seeing this article. I have been to Durban but, alas, I am not South African and I'm a brand new Wikipedian. EricEnfermero (talk) 08:14, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Opening Paragraphs

I've attempted to improve the grammar of the opening paragraphs as well as indicating the applicability of the "generic" term "curry." Further work is needed everywhere in this article to "tighten" it (a bit) ... in particular, to get away from the notion that "curry" is a "powder" ... Yankeecook (talk) 22:54, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Nice effort you're putting into the article, however, without providing for sources for your claims it looks like a lot of original research. I'm guessing someone is going to undo your edits at some point. If you have references to back up your claims it would be a good idea and helpful to the article if you would add them in. SQGibbon (talk) 02:56, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

In response: We have discussed that the edits to which you refer were all in the "lead" and are substantiated by more detailed information (with references) later in the article. Accordingly, it seems preferable not to "load down" the lead with duplicate references. Yankeecook (talk) 19:10, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed Changes

Much of the content following the "lead" of this article seems unfocused on the principal topic: Curry. Yet, it contains much interesting information concerning culinary practices of numerous regions. Unfortunately, most of this content contains very few external references (although I know them to be available and can provide many of them).

I'd like to propose (and propose to author) a thoroughgoing re-write of the remainder of the article. In particular, I'd be interested in feedback about the following points:

• Restrict the content of this article to dishes commonly considered to be "curries" and exclude detailed mentions of other dishes such as "dal" or "roti" which are "accompaniments to curry" but not (actually) "curry" itself.
• Eliminate virtually all references in this article to "curry" as a "powder." In fact, Curry powder already has an independent article. Recommend eliminating virtually all of the "Curry Powder" section here.
• Much of the general content on cuisine in this article is duplicated in the numerous independent articles on regional cuisines (for example, Gujarati cuisine or Pakistani cuisine or Thai cuisine to cite but three). Shouldn't content not specifically related to "curry" be moved to and incorporated into those articles?

Please share your thoughts here on the Talk Page. Thank you. Yankeecook (talk) 19:10, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Dry and Wet Curries OR Curries and Curried

:Quote: Curries may be either "wet" or "dry." Wet curries contain significant amounts of sauce or gravy based on yoghurt, coconut milk, legume purée (dal) , or stock. Dry curries are cooked with very little liquid which is allowed to evaporate, leaving the other ingredients coated with the spice mixture. Unquote There is not citation for this. I have always understood (also no citation as yet) that curries to consist of dish in a sauce whereas what is decribed here as a "dry" curry is simply called a curried dish e.g. curried meat, curried vegetables etc. I realise there are "dry curry" recipes but is this a neologism? Wikipedia has always steered clear of recipes as such. Dainamo (talk) 23:13, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. After consulting at least a dozen Indian cookery books (many printed in India, but in English), I'm comfortable standing by the concept "wet and dry curries." Because the term "curry" itself is essentially an English-language imposition on the foodways of another culture, it's not a very precise term. I notice that you appear to be British -- and I grant that there's a slight difference between British and American usage. Here in the US, "curried" more or less specifically refers to Westernized dishes which consist largely of leftover meats in cream sauce with a minimum of commercial curry powder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yankeecook (talk • contribs) 11:15, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Meat vs. Beef Curry

Somebody changed the caption for the Bangladeshi Beef Curry photo to Meat Curry (which would imply goat or lamb). However, the original caption for the photo (from Wikimedia Commons) was written by the photographer, it says Beef and it seems to make little sense to second-guess him. Yankeecook (talk) 11:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Reverted Changes 5 July 2012

Queenmomcat ... I reverted the changes for the following reasons: "varying" implies that things change from time to time; "more or less" implies that some things are complex and some things are not ... not really the same idea. Removed your addition of "recipes" because, so far as we know, there were originally no "recipes" in the modern sense for most of these traditional dishes ... "spices and/or herbs" because some dishes contain spices; some dishes contain herbs; some dishes contain both. Please don't make "style" edits that change the meaning and sense of carefully selected wording. Thanks. (I wrote the original lead). Yankeecook (talk) 15:12, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Curry in Great Britain

Surprised there is no reference to "Going for an English"; the word "curry" is increasingly pejorative, especially among Brits under 50 who usually talk about indian as in: going for an indian. 'Curry' for many is reserved for the bland imaginary dishes referred to in the section 'Historical development' under this heading, whereas 'indian' denotes dishes made by or devised by those of indian descent and/or not using a concoction made from something called 'curry-powder'. British people of indian descent seem less reserved about the word curry than those of less identifiable caucasian origin who call themselves 'English'.

There ought to be a cross reference to Patak's, too. Patak's sauces are the main means of preparing an indian meal at home, and they also make popular microwave readymeals. Tolken (talk) 07:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

UK or US spelling of this article.

I would say this article should use angliced grammar and spelling. The UK has some influence in the spread of curry, and it has become an adopted national dish. The article also is a C class of interest to the UK group. Now I wouldnt start anglicing an article on Hamburger would I? :) Irondome (talk) 19:24, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Reversion of change in lead: May 17, 2013

The "previous" version of the lead was carefully written to convey the nuances of various cultural perceptions of "curry" in different parts of the world. The generic concept of "curry" as understood (for example) by the British (or Americans) has little to do with the specific actual Indian models on which "British" curry dishes are based. Please don't make "style" edits that change the meaning and sense of carefully selected wording. Thanks. (I wrote the original lead). Yankeecook (talk) 00:13, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Removed section on defecation

Removed the line "One notable trait of curry, is the disturbance of the human digestive system. Usually leading to 'sloppy', 'wet' and 'barely solid' defecation. The defecation is usually tainted with the smell and colour of the curry eaten beforehand."

Unnecessary, not cited, and may contain original research. Seriously, it's inappropriate to a food article. Zola (talk) 00:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Korea

In South Korea, "karry rah-ees" or "karry bap" is moderately popular. It is a greenish-brownish sauce made from curry powder and contains potatoes, carrots and small quantities of other vegetables. the sauce is served with white rice. For a picture, see http://ask.nate.com/qna/view.html?n=8830546. 211.225.33.104 (talk) 23:48, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

RE: Hannah Glasse

The article currently states: "The use of hot spices was not mentioned [i.e., by Mrs. Glasse], which reflected the limited use of chili in India — chili plants had only been introduced into India around the late 15th century and at that time were only popular in southern India." The statement is unsupported by a reference; there is little reason to believe that her 18th century English cookery book reflected Indian practices either at that time, or during the preceding 300 years. Suggest it simply be removed. Yankeecook2 (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

source for more citations

Most of the citations that are being asked for are for really old stuff -- that the internet is not really that good at -- someone is going to actually have to go to a library and check out a dead tree type of a book for some of the more recent facts- particularly with the British love of curry - see http://www.zum.de/whkmla/sp/0910/jinhyuck/jinhyuck2.html I dont think wikipedia would allow citing it directly but it has some sources worth following up.--Currystove3 (talk) 03:36, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

1747 book?

The article currently says The first curry recipe in Britain appeared in The Art of Cookery made Plain and Easy by Hannah Glasse in 1747. The first edition of her book used only black pepper and coriander seeds for seasoning of "currey". By the fourth edition of the book, other ingredients such as turmeric and ginger were called for. According to the Library of Congress (link to catalog entry), the fourth edition was published in 1751. However, the image File:Hannah Glasse To make a Currey the Indian Way 1747.jpg which is included here is claimed to be of the 1747 (first?) edition - and the text clearly mentions ginger and turmeric (but no coriander). So it appears that something is wrong: Either the article here is wrong and, in fact, the 1747 edition already mentions ginger and turmeric. Or the image was not taken from the 1747 edition, as claimed in the Commons description, but from a later one. Maybe User:Chiswick Chap who uploaded that image can help with clarifying this matter? Gestumblindi (talk) 23:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

The cited text is correct. The image was taken from the 1758 edition. I've updated the Commons description. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:39, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: Thank you! I modified the image caption accordingly. What do you think, wouldn't it be appropriate to also move the image from File:Hannah Glasse To make a Currey the Indian Way 1747.jpg to a file name such as Hannah Glasse To make a Currey the Indian Way 1758.jpg or Hannah Glasse To make a Currey the Indian Way 1747 (1758 edition).jpg or similar? Do you have a suggestion? I could move it on Commons... Gestumblindi (talk) 22:12, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Fine. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:14, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

OK, I moved the file to File:Hannah Glasse To make a Currey the Indian Way 1758 edition.jpg. Gestumblindi (talk) 23:39, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Etymology

Regarding "kari was first encountered in the mid-17th century by...

Can this be changed to something more descriptive? I suggest, "Westerners first encountered kari", or, "Europeans were first exposed to kari". The generalization as it is now, really is pretty eurocentric. Thanks for considering.

D k mackenzie (talk) 21:29, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Disputed statements regarding fats and health

I have raised a Disputed Inline tag in the Fiji section regarding "Curries are often very healthy if less oil is used in cooking and they can be made even healthier if vegetables are added and fat is removed from meat."

Apart from the confusion between "healthful" and "healthy" (who would want to eat a sick curry?), there is a problem here with the changing state of accepted medical opinion around the consumption of fats and oils, and saturated fats in particular. There is a second issue around the differing needs of biologically diverse individuals to maintain their individual health. There is a third issue around the assumption that vegetables alone can make a meal more healthful without regard to what other meals the individual has eaten.

Though health advice is probably completely out of place in this article, the problem sentence would have been better if it referred to ways curry could be lower in fat, rather than more healthful.

"Pij" (talk) 02:32, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

The section has no references, reads like a recipe, and leans toward original research. I removed the worst cases per WP:OR. --Zefr (talk) 03:57, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Curry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140913110011/http://www.rendangnaniko.com/blog/arti-diabalik-masakan-rendang/ to http://www.rendangnaniko.com/blog/arti-diabalik-masakan-rendang/
• Added archive https://archive.is/20130411190436/http://www.sb-worldwide.com/curry/history.html to http://www.sb-worldwide.com/curry/history.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:20, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Archive URLs work, but these are not good sources, so I will remove. --Zefr (talk) 21:53, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Russian curry

The content and source below were removed because the source is an individual's blog, WP:NOTBLOG. A better WP:SECONDARY source is needed. --Zefr (talk) 23:21, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Curry is widely eaten in Russia. There, it is known as карри русский (karri russkii). Russian curry consists of beef, lamb and other vegetables mixed with sour cream (smetana), tomato paste, cinnamon, cloves and chillies. It is very similar to beef stroganoff. It is often served with blini and plov on the side.

I removed it again. It popped up again. The source does not mention Russian Curry at all! TheWizardof2017 (talk) 20:53, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

"Coriander"

I am not a foodie, but I am told what is used in curry is coriander seeds, not the leaves, which as known as cilantro in the United States. If this is so, then the links all need to be piped to Coriander seed or Coriander (spice), both of which are redirects that I have retargeted to the "Fruits" section of the Coriander article. Our article covers both the herb and the spice, and gives the culinary uses of the leaves first. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:49, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

So you want to talk instead of edit warring and still revert like an edit warrior

The lead talks of "Indian subcontinent", when in reality nobody upper of South india ever heard of the word curry in their languages. This is nonsensical enough to rewrite the whole article. Curries are strictly South indian products. The rest of the world (including Northern India) knew of it only after British colonialism. Please rewrite the article to reflect correct facts instead of fiction --213.225.4.30 (talk) 16:17, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

If you wish to change the article it it is your responsibility to gain consensus if challenged, before repeating your edit. This article is not about the word "curry", it is about the dishes commonly referred to by the name "curry". If you have anything relevant you wish to add about the application of the name to dishes not previously called "curry", then please provide a source. I'm afraid saying "I'm knowledgable enough on this subject" is not adequate, simply because you are just an anonymous person on the internet and the reader has no way of judging your reliability. Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:29, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't think curries originated just in south india while south india was part of various Indian Empires. Especially given the fact that tomatoes and potatoes now widely used in curries did not get imported into India before 17th century. It is not like drinking black tea's tea leaves which was discovered and used by british. Vedic texts contain discussions of herbal preparation for food and health especially Atharveda which details various curry based dishes supposed to calm the nerves.

hi, please add this historical reference

The Kanhadade Prabandha of Padmanābha written in ad 1455 describes the food served at the table of this ruler. There were ‘sev, suhali, manda, papads, khaja, salan, badi, lapsi-ka of the panchadari variety, kansar, dhan and many other delicious dishes’.

salan is the urdu/hindi word used in the north india for curry. 175.137.72.188 (talk) 04:17, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

References

POV quote

@Kautilya3: Provided quote along with given source does not say - "as early as 2500 BCE in the Indus Valley, in what is modern-day Pakistan" - There is no mention of "Indus valley" in that provided sentence in CNN news page, yet the quote is added on top of the page, clearly a POV edit and natioanlistic in nature. 117.198.112.173 (talk) 22:17, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/curry-origins-history/index.html See the quote here. 117.198.112.173 (talk) 22:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

I didn't know that "Indus Valley" was a nation :-) Anyway, I deleted the reference. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:24, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

@Kautilya3: There are several scholarly sources under history which can be added/talks about Indus Valley specifically. CNN does not provide their sources for "modern-day Pakistan", only known study of "Oldest curry" is from IVC site from Haryana, in India. 117.198.112.173 (talk) 00:24, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

1. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-36415079 (Cooking the world's oldest known curry, BBC) - Specifics the study and from where.

"For in 2010, when advanced science met archaeology at an excavation site in Farmana - southeast of the largest Harappan city of Rakhigarhi - they made history, and it was edible. Archaeologists Arunima Kashyap and Steve Webber of Vancouver's Washington State University used the method of starch analysis to trace the world's first-known or "oldest" proto-curry of aubergine, ginger and turmeric from the pot shard of a bulbous handi (pot). Extracting starch molecules from 50 different surfaces - including pots, stone tools, and the dental enamel of humans and domesticated cows, often fed leftovers - they identified the molecular thumbprints of vegetables, fruits and spices, and studied the effect of heat, salt and sugar on them."

2. https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/health/Spicy-food-leads-to-longer-life/article17077718.ece

"Study by Arunima Kashyap and Steve Weber of Washington State University. They analysed the remains of starch grains from human teeth (as well as in a cooking pot excavated from the site) found in the ancient town of Farmane in Haryana (a well-known Harappan site) and identified ginger and turmeric in it. It thus appears that the curry that we make and use today traces its ancestry back to over 4,000 years ago!. Besides ginger and turmeric, Harappan food included lentils and moong dal, rice, millet and bananas. It is interesting how spices such as ginger and turmeric were used as early as 4,000 years ago in the Indus Valley civilisation. We now know that ginger contains molecules that help against inflammation, control osteo-arthritis and modulate immunity. And we know largely from the excellent and exhaustive work done at the National Institute of Nutrition at Hyderabad (e.g., the book: “Turmeric - the Salt of the Orients is the Spice of Life,” Dr Kamala Krishnaswamy, Allied Publishers, 2007) how golden the herb, turmeric, is." 00:24, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

@Kautilya3:There is no source for oldest "curry" in Mohanjo Daro, as the only known study for oldest "Proto-curry" is from Rakhigari in Haryana, in India. 117.198.112.173 (talk) 00:33, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Curry being a Tamil word

Please add proper sources to show curry is derived from Tamil word. Otherwise there are many words in many languages which match phonetics of "curry". I want to see a clear source that shows "curry" came from a Tamil word. Otherwise this is just conjuncture. Precisepie (talk) 04:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

In fact a better word is from Telugu Kura... Which is close what a curry actually means now and not some kind of relish Precisepie (talk) 04:08, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

The source cited to show the entemological history of curry is a dictionary. Please add a better source or the part about derived from Tamil will be deleted. I will wait for 7 days from now. (From 07/29/2020) Precisepie (talk) 13:03, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

There are two sources, both etymological dictionaries. I can't imagine why these aren't "proper" or could be bettered. The article already says there are other similar words, but what's important is how it entered English. If you have better sources that say differently then please provide them. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:21, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 December 2020

I have issue with the below excerpt from the article:

Curry powder, a commercially prepared mixture of spices, is largely a Western creation, dating to the 18th century. Such mixtures are commonly thought to have first been prepared by Indian merchants for sale to members of the British Colonial government and army returning to Britain.

My issue is that Curry Powder cannot be termed as a Western "creation" in the 18th Century since it had been traditionally used as a generic combination of spices to make several curries for thousands of years in the Indian subcontinent. It is the alternate name given to the traditional Indian combination of spices known as "Garam Masala" which is used in hundreds of Indian curries since ages. Furthermore, since it is admitted here that it was prepared by Indian merchants, it is erroneous to term it as a "Western" creation. In other words, "Curry Powder" is simply a result of trade between Indian merchants and European colonial traders to export an combination of spices that had been traditionally in use in the Indian subcontinent for thousands of years. Therefore, I request you to modify the sentence to reflect as follows.

"Curry powder", a commercially prepared mixture of spices marketed in the West, was first exported to Britain in the 18th Century when Indian merchants sold a traditionally used general concoction of spices, alternatively referred to as "Garam Masala" in the Indian subcontinent, to the British colonial government and army returning to Britain.

Similarly, I have reservation with the following excerpt:

Curry powder is a spice mixture of widely varying composition developed by the British during the days of the Raj as a means of approximating the taste of Indian cuisine at home. Masala refers to spices, and this is the name given to the thick and pasty sauce based on a combination of spices with ghee (clarified butter), butter, palm oil or coconut milk. Most commercial curry powders available in Britain, the U.S. and Canada rely heavily on ground turmeric, in turn producing a very yellow sauce. Lesser ingredients in these Western yellow curry powders are often coriander, cumin, fenugreek, mustard, chili, black pepper and salt. By contrast, curry powders and curry pastes produced and consumed in India are extremely diverse; some red, some yellow, some brown; some with five spices and some with as many as 20 or more. Besides the previously mentioned spices, other commonly found spices in different curry powders in India are allspice, white pepper, ground mustard, ground ginger, cinnamon, roasted cumin, cloves, nutmeg, mace, green cardamom seeds or black cardamom pods, bay leaves and coriander seeds.

I request you to edit the same with the following modifications:

Curry powder is a spice mixture exported by Indian merchants to the British during the times of the Raj to provide a ready made generic pre-mix of spices that were traditionally and historically used extensively in Indian cuisine, for the British market. Masala refers to a particular Indian spice or a combination of such spices, often added to ghee or other cooking oils as base for preparing several Indian dishes. The composition of individual spices in the curry powder has been adapted to suit the Western taste in most commercial curry powders available in Britain, the U.S. and Canada with heavy reliance on ground turmeric, in turn producing a very yellow sauce. Mild quantities of coriander, cumin, fenugreek, mustard, chili, black pepper and salt are added to approximate Indian cuisine to the Western palate. By contrast, curry powders and curry pastes produced and consumed in India, apart from the Garam Masala from which the curry powder is derived, are extremely diverse; some red, some yellow, some brown; some with five spices and some with as many as 20 or more. Besides the previously mentioned spices, other commonly found spices in different curry powders in India are allspice, white pepper, ground mustard, ground ginger, cinnamon, roasted cumin, cloves, nutmeg, mace, green cardamom seeds or black cardamom pods, bay leaves and coriander seeds. PrateekChakraverty1 (talk) 16:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I've replaced what was in the lead with your suggestion. However, the section on curry powder was unsourced, as is your above suggested text. So I have replaced this with a sourced extract of the Curry powder article. If you have any improvements, with sources, please list them here. Thanks. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:46, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 December 2020 (2)

With respect to the excerpt:

Curry powder, a commercially prepared mixture of spices marketed in the West, was first exported to Britain in the 18th Century when Indian merchants sold a traditionally used general concoction of spices, alternatively referred to as "Garam Masala" in the Indian subcontinent, to the British colonial government and army returning to Britain.

Please replace "alternatively referred to as "Garam Masala" in the Indian subcontinent" to "similar to the "Garam Masala" spice concoction of the Indian subcontinent PrateekChakraverty1 (talk) 18:29, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done  Darth Flappy ^«Talk» 19:53, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2020

With respect to the excerpt, "For example, in original traditional cuisines, the precise selection of spices for each dish is a matter of national or regional cultural tradition, religious practice, and, to some extent, family preference." I request you to add the phrase ", as evolved over thousands of years" after "family preference" to reflect the historical context of the cuisines. PrateekChakraverty1 (talk) 13:18, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure that makes sense - it implies that it's the family preferences have evolved over thousands of years which I guess might be true in some cases but I think it's rare for most people to be able to trace their family back one thousand years let alone what their individual curry preferences were. I'd prefer to have "some of these recipes have evolved over thousands of years" as a standalone sentence, preferably referenced. --Paul ❬talk❭ 14:38, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:45, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Changes to the Etymology Section

Zombie gunner wishes to make two changes to the Etymology section which I disagree with:

1. Addition of the sentence "In North Indian languages curry is called Salan". I'm not disputing that this is factually correct, but 'etymology' refers to the origin and development of a particular word - not the thing itself. I do not believe that the word 'curry' has evolved from the word 'salan' and, unless there is a reference to indicate otherwise, it is not relevant to this section.

2. Removal of the sentence "The word 'cury' appears in the 1390s English cookbook, The Forme of Cury, but is unrelated and comes from the Middle French word 'cuire', meaning 'to cook' " . Strictly speaking, I guess this might be considered off-topic, but I think the sentence is valid here because it preempts any misunderstanding which might be derived from the book's title, and it certainly doesn't detract from the over-all article.

I've brought this to the Talk page to allow Zombie gunner the opportunity to justify the changes and gain the consensus required to make them. Obscurasky (talk) 17:19, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Good points, Obscurasky, and I agree with you. No changes to etymology as indicated by Zombie gunner are justified. Zefr (talk) 18:07, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I agree with your point. The book might be removed here, because this information could be presented at the book's wiki page.ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 19:15, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

I am just mind blown that you are saying that i have suggested that the word curry has evolved from word salan, and this indicates that you have not bothered to pay any attention to my remarks i made with the revert. Where do you have issues comprehending relevant, since curry as an english term generalizes north indian 'salan' hence needed to be mentioned in etymology? The sentence is added to the section since its the most suitable, where else do you suggest we add that sentence. I'm also very surprised that you have found objection on the relevant content by a completely irrelevant forme of cury is not objectionable. Secondly, you never suggested complete removal only allocating at a suitable position, and yet you are completely removing the content. Zombie gunner (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Please don't be offended. I'm not saying the information you added is factually incorrect, or even without merit - I'm saying that it's inappropriate for the etymology section. You're correct that I did completely remove it, but you are perfectly free to re-insert it in a more suitable position within the article. Obscurasky (talk) 22:29, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

There's a problem with the definition of kari. If you look in a Tamil dictionary, it says the definition is charcoal. https://agarathi.com/word/%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%B0%E0%AE%BF — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.197.253.137 (talk) 19:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Reversion discussion / Issue with finding sources for South India subheadings

The reversion in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Curry&oldid=1005436298

One of the reasons there are so few good sources for anything relating to South Indian cuisine is because English-language writers haven't given it the same interest and in-depth study they've given European, Latin American, East Asian or even other regional South Asian cuisines. The same goes for native-language writers for a different set of reasons. The fact that there are acceptable sources for information on vindaloo, rogan josh, and goshtaba, preparations popular in restaurants the West, but nothing for the rest of Goan or Kashmiri cuisine perfectly demonstrates this. Plugging-in any of the terms I used – iguru, pulusu, pappu – into a Google Scholar search yields little to no good hits either. Even the one scholarly source I used that describes Telugu cuisine in-depth only focuses on a single caste community in a single district in Telangana, so it's very incomplete.

I could write a treatise on Telugu cuisine that revealed its sophistication, but because of my lack of credentials as either an academic or a culinary professional, it wouldn't fulfill Wikipedia:Weight or Wikipedia:Reliable sources. So the choice here isn't between good sources and bad sources, it's between folk/lay scholarship and nothing. It's clear that previous editors of this page have had to strike that balance and have mostly erred on the side of allowing unsourced information but flagging it as such, so that citations can be added in the future. Without such a compromise, South Indian curries, the very origin of the English word "curry," would remain clouded by a cultural and language barrier.

I ask you to reconsider the reversion of my edit and adopt the same stance as earlier editors. Xerces1492 (talk) 00:57, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Reliable sources are always required. Self published material won't be accepted. Flagged entries should be addressed rather immediately in my opinion and removed within 3 days. In any case, flagged content is not an encouragement to add inadequately sourced material.ThaThinThaKiThaTha (talk) 12:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2021

Please change BCE in the history section back to BC since it is incorrect. IF you are going to use a calendar, then use it, don't put your personal agenda in it. Ever wonder why people are reluctant to donate money to you? This is one of the reasons. Leave BC as BC and not BCE and AD as AD and not CE. I cannot re-name the meter if I don't like it and still claim to be using the Metric system, because it isn't if I call the meter something else. Think about it. 198.57.14.68 (talk) 02:07, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Either is acceptable on Wikipedia, as long as it is used consistently within an article. See MOS:ERA. RudolfRed (talk) 02:31, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh the irony. "I cannot re-name the meter" - do you mean 'metre'?

SandJ-on-WP (talk) 06:12, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

I think Curry (or Kari) are from the same root as Persian word "Khoaresh" (or "Khoresh") is. Both mean "side dish", something you eat with your main dish (bread or rice). Khoresh (older pronunciation Khoaresh") is composed of "khoar" means eating and "ash" which is a popular suffix to create nouns. It seems "sh" was dropped in Indian dialect over time, and Kh became K. Khoaresh ==> KAre — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.212.113.183 (talk) 08:48, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Jamaican Curry

Any reason curried dishes in Jamaica aren't included in a regional subsection? Ryecatcher773 (talk) 05:28, 30 March 2023 (UTC)