Talk:Taiwanese cuisine/Archive 1

Archive 1

Changing spelling

Game meets for those living in the mountainous areas include deer, and flying squirrel intestines, a delicacy as regarded by the Bunun people. Another is ‘stinky’ meat – that is, ‘maggoty game’ that has begun to rot, which is then barbecued, fried, seasoned with garlic and ginger then served with spicy sauce.

............. I think they meant "game meats"? Also...is this actually cited somewhere? Is it _rotting_ or is it aging, similar to how we age beef to make it more tender? Does it have maggots in it? Can someone clarify this? Flying squirrel intestines? That seems like a very difficult-to-obtain ingredient. Is that a serious post, or is it a joke? 192.33.240.95 (talk) 21:17, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

minor edit

Ba-wan in this case is a meat sphere or meat ball. While the character for circle and sphere are the same, in this case, the meaning is sphere and not circle. The food itself is spherical. A similar case where the character for "circle" is used in the name of a food, is tang-yuan's, which are little spherical objects that are glutenous and can be sweet or salty.

Trad. Simp. Pinyin English 圓 圆 yuán circle; round; circular; spherical; (of the moon) full; unit of Chinese currency (Yuan); tactful; to justify

Kelidimari (talk) 20:21, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

romanization stew

Go ahead and jumble all the romanizations together, and even use homebrew gio with no k or g at the end, and zou for meat. --Jidanni

If you are referring to 愛玉, I believe what is written there ("ò-giô") is a separate (but equally legitimate) name from "ài-gio̍k-á", though I don't know how widespread one is compared with the other. The Romanization involving "zou" had already been corrected last week. --ian (talk) 15:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

菜圃蛋

Question: What is the POJ for 菜圃蛋? A Mandarin-sounding reading is chhài-phó͘ tàn. But perhaps it is more like 菜脯卵 or 菜脯蛋, POJ: chhài-pó͘ nn̄g. I have found this likely through web searches. Please confirm. Question originated by Emingc. Oniows 01:48, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

My mistake,It should be 菜脯蛋 not 菜圃蛋 after I check the official web dictionary. I am not quite familiar with the writing of POJ ,so do not have enough ability to confirm which is the right one for 菜脯蛋. Emingc 17:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

According to http://203.64.42.21/tg/chhiokhe/khoaN.asp?id=193, 菜脯蛋 is chhài-pó͘-nn̄g. Let's go with that. Oniows 00:02, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Edible tea leaves?

Isn't there a huge range of edible tea leave dishes in Taiwan? Benjwong 21:59, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Tea leaves are not very often used is Taiwanese cuisine. In most occasions where tea leaves are used in a cuisine, it's used as a flavouring, the leaves themselves are seldom eaten. The only cuisine I can think of which utilize tea leaves and may be seen regularly is 茶葉蛋, lit. "tea leaf egg". 111.248.6.31 (talk) 04:59, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Shaved ice

Taiwanese shaved ice dishes like mango ice (芒果冰) are not like snow cones at all--more like a cholado on a plate; they are a base of shaved ice with sauces/creams/custards and fresh fruits added--usually topped with mango/other fruit or vanilla ice cream, at least per my experiences in Taichung and Kaohsiung. This page illustrates it nicely (and makes my mouth water/teeth hurt): http://www.ytower.com.tw/prj/prj_256/p1.asp. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.141.105.19 (talk) 08:02, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Suck

This article sucks! Let's get on with it! (Heroeswithmetaphors) talk 18:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Breakfast

Does anyone want to add anything about what people eat for breakfast? egg roll with bacon / cheese etc. I don't know the Chinese for it, sorry.. it is however super popular.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.171.43.234 (talk) 04:24, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

revert

Hey, Kazuha1029, let's talk! valereee (talk) 21:09, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

you may not be familiar with Taiwanese cuisine, but to express a blank statement that Taiwanese food is the real authentic version of Chinese food I'm pretty sure most editors will not agree with. I did a search and found no evidence of this and given many years living in Taiwan have never heard such a crazy argument. You only provided one source which sounded entirely like an opinion as "someone quoting someone else". The fact that she said "KMT said this" sounds very unreliable. For example, whom from KMT said it? At what occasion did he/she say it? Did he/she represent KMT and said it as the party's official position, or just one person from KMT who voiced it as his/her own opinion (which is likely the case, if you can even pinpoint the person who expressed this idea)? The fact that you initially said "Taiwan expressed it is the real authentic Chinese food" tells me you probably don't know.

Secondly, Taiwanese food is a branch off Min cuisine in general, and as KMT arrived Taiwan, brought in an influx of Chinese cuisine from other parts of Chinese provinces. Over time, Taiwanese food has gone through countless transformations as different provinces' cuisine fuse and combine. Taiwanese cuisine is known to be innovative and various, it's the exact opposite of "traditional Chinese cuisine". Think of Taiwanese beef noodle soup and how different it is from China.

Thirdly, the idea of communism destroying cuisine flavour is completely baseless, and sounds like KMT politician who is simply against communism. Personal opinion like this should not be on Wikipedia, not to mention this is not about politics, but a cuisine article.Kazuha1029 (talk) 03:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Its kind of ridiculous but that was/is the KMT's position, but they were also kind right though... In the '80s and '90s Taiwanese chefs had to reteach Chinese chefs a lot of techniques and dishes which had been lost in the cultural revolution (most profesional chefs were either rusticated or killed and traditional food production and distribution patterns collapsed). Taiwan did actually play an important role in preserving traditional Chinese cuisine. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 03:46, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

where is your proof? I understand you have your own political standpoint. And if you check my Chinese Wikipedia intro you'll see we support the same political ideology. That being said, on Wikipedia I am neutral. I simply reverted to the most recent stable version which is what you should have done, instead of blindly supporting the person who posted a biased statement. I'm quite disappointed at your actions.Kazuha1029 (talk) 03:55, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm beginning to suspect that perhaps there is a reading comprehension misunderstanding here, thats not a biased statement and the source appears to be a WP:RS... Are you challenging the reliability of the source? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 04:03, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

where's the source where KMT said Taiwanese food retains qualities that is destroyed by Communism? And if they did indeed say this, whom from KMT? and if it's one person from KMT who said it, could you say that he/she represents the entire KMT's view? Because it is quite a generalized statement on the whole population/political party don't you think? To give you an example, if someone from KMT says he/she supports Taiwanese independence, that's most likely just one person's opinion so you can't say "Oh the entire KMT supports Taiwanese independence", does this make sense? Secondly, we're getting source from the food historian King, who in turn said, "KMT said this". We'll need more sources, preferably primary, so we can cite it and say "ok yes KMT did hold this point of view" but it's a view not supported by the general Taiwanese population (for example, pan-green people will most likely refute this argument that Taiwanese food is "Chinese"). I appreciate your edits, but I'm really trying to be neutral here. Can you revert it back to the non-controversial version until we reach a consensus? Thank you. Kazuha1029 (talk) 04:11, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Primary sources are never preferable, what the frick are you talking about? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Valereee: I've provided you my arguments, and I look forward to a civilized and thought-provoking debate with you. But for now, you need to revert your edit back as you need to build consensus in the talk page first. Right now the most stable version is what we had before. If you can successfully provide great source and convince me I'm happy to learn from you and accept your edit. Please go ahead and revert it back to the non-controversial version. Thank youKazuha1029 (talk) 03:58, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I also read the source you provided in its entirety. You have to be very careful, King said, "This chapter presents the conundrum of Chinese culinary nationalism from the vantage point of the Republic of China, as seen through the pages Fu Pei-mei...like many others of her generation, Fu promoted the idea that Taiwan alone had preserved authentic Chinese culinary traditions." Need I say more? Don't you think you're being quite biased that you cut and pasted only the information that you wanted? King was sourcing various points of view regarding culinary nationalism and she even pointed out that "Fu acknowledged that after the imposed exile of Civil War, Mainlander cuisine had become mixed up" (page 64). This was exactly what I said above in my second point. Please revert your edit. @Horse Eye's Back: Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kazuha1029 (talk • contribs)

Kazuha1029, that ping to Horse Eye's Back probably didn't work, you have to 1. start a new line 2. ping in the original edit (a broken ping cannot be fixed) and 3. sign your post, all in the same edit. valereee (talk) 14:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kazuha1029, the assertion is attributed already, but I'm happy to add something to further clarify. What would you suggest? valereee (talk) 14:10, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

From my understanding of the issues they have with it some sort of dating would be the preferred clarity. Do you perhaps think you can expand it to a stand alone paragraph? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:11, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Valereee, thank you for the reminder. The problem I have isn't the source, it's the way this was written, here are my proposed changes and why:

1. Move this to the top, after "After WWII, as a result of the Kuomintang retreat to the island which brought along many Chinese cuisines outside the province of Fujian or Southeast China. After that, the dishes from whole mainland China especially Guangdong, Chaoshan, Shanghai, Sichuan and Beijing could be easily found in Taiwan." there's currently no citation here and basically expressed the same idea as your source. This chapter you cited is a good source. The reason for this is that this sentence in its current place feels very out of place as the previous sentence mentions Taiwanese cuisine innovation, yet right after you said it's traditional Chinese cuisine.
2. You cannot say that the Nationalist Party said this. KMT at that time was a period of political propaganda, where they considered themselves as the Real and Only China, and basically educated its people that communism destroyed everything at mainland. The current KMT does not say this (which is why I asked you for citation and whom from KMT said it, and you are unable to provide this). And if you really want to add it, you have to clarify: "Fu Pei Mei, like many others of her generation, argued that Taiwanese cuisine properly preserved preserved authentic Chinese culinary traditions." (please remember, that Fu said this, not King, so it was false that you attributed to King).
3. just for your information, as I notice you seem to be unfamiliar with why this is such a big deal. This article was written in the perspective of Fu. Fu's incentives was to sell her cookbooks (so she's not neutral) because she wants to advertise that "Chinese Food from Taiwan is authentic". This is pointed out by King, where Fu presented conflicting arguments to foreigners vs Taiwanese people. Secondly, Fu presented the fact that "Chinese food in Taiwan is authentic", she did not say "Taiwanese cuisine is authentic Chinese Cuisine". ' You have to be very careful as you're getting into politics that you do not understand. Most Taiwanese nowadays will be very offended and completely disagree that Taiwanese cuisine is Chinese cuisine. Back in the 70s and 80s, Fu (Like many of her generation as described by King), believes Taiwan is the real China so they did not have this problem. In this article, we also expressed the idea that Taiwanese cuisine is heavily influenced by Southern Min cuisine, Japanese cuisine, and an influx of other Chinese cuisine from KMT. It's not accurate to say Taiwanese cuisine is Chinese cuisine in general.Kazuha1029 (talk) 16:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

You've misinterpreted something, nothing there is saying that Taiwanese cuisine is Chinese cuisine... Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:41, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

What is even authentic Chinese? Who gets to decide who is the real China? I have issues with that term. The word "properly preserve" and "authentic Chinese", sounds snobbish and undue opinion. Like it implies other countries don't preserve traditional Chinese culinary practises. Namely the mainland China. As if modern China today doesn't even have any authentic Chinese food compared to Taiwan. That's both not possible and highly subjective. Chinese cuisine is huuuge and today the mainland probably has more variety of Chinese cuisine than Taiwan. If you're going to present a fact, at least make it feasible and not politicised. It's a snobbish opinion that is not an appropriate fact. If you go to China, I am certain they have heaps of authentic Chinese food that they had still continued from thousands of years ago. It's much more neutral and less snobby to say Taiwan faithfully preserved their "ancestral Chinese" cooking traditions. Instead of saying preserving "authentic Chinese", which is just inappropriate and has a heavily political biased tone. Soyegg2417 (talk) 16:24, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

edit warring

@Kazuha1029: please self revert, you're now at 4 reverts in under 24 hours. I would hate to have to get you blocked for the edit warring (blatant 3rr violation). Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:45, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Horse Eye's Back: what? I did not revert. I am well aware of the rule. Please see my edit. I enhanced the sentence and fixed grammar mistakes. Is there anything else you'd like me to add? Because I thought we reached a consensus here? Let me know what other suggestions you'd like and I can add in. Thank you.Kazuha1029 (talk) 16:49, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

and please do not accuse me for edit warring. I did not start this. The initial reverts were made to the stable version, which you both should have done until a settlement has been reached. I have followed all wikipedia rules thus far and I have been very respectful and did not revert your edits. I am an experienced editor who have contributed a lot to this article and Taiwan-related articles. You really hurt my feelings for saying that. Could you apologize please? I see your edit history and I completely agree with many of your edits. You have made good contributions to Taiwan-related articles too. I want us to collaborate in the future.Kazuha1029 (talk) 16:52, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I would love to collaborate but this [1] is unambiguously a partial revert and its your fourth within 24 hours. I don't think you understand how far out of my way I'm going to avoid having to get you temporarily blocked. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:55, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

I have reverted it as you asked. But please avoid the threatening tone please. I feel really intimidated. All I'm trying to do is to satisfy both of your requests. I am working as hard as I can. I hope you can assume good faith in my edit.Kazuha1029 (talk) 17:07, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

@Kazuha1029, this edit is a reversion. Just because you also added something doesn't mean the stuff you reverted -- again -- doesn't count as a reversion.

FTR, we don't really make decisions based on who might be offended or disagree. We make decisions based on sources. I'm open to improving what is attributed to this source, but not to simply erasing it because someone in Taiwan might be offended or because of politics. valereee (talk) 16:56, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Wow a taiwan article on CCPedia that is in constant edit war between normal people and the commie regulars who support genocidal regimes in beijing? imagine my shock! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:9366:E040:F0B6:8958:20B5:D461 (talk) 12:49, 1 March 2022 (UTC)