Talk:Baklava/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Gastrin

An editor added Gastrin (a Greek baklava-like dessert) to the article and claims already justified by sources again, with the past fringe too. Please, if you want to add about it, which I guess you have taken from here:

• greekfood.about.com/od/phyllopastriesbaklava/r/gastrin.htm Gastrin Recipe - Greek food. About.com

Then you have to source your claims. --92slim (talk) 01:40, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 July 2022

I want to change gramlar mistakes 151.135.165.134 (talk) 21:46, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:00, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Place of origin in the infobox

Hi Uness232, you reverted my edit which removed the place of origin of this food from the infobox, however, the reason for the revert is simply not correct. You said "in its current form, it originated somewhere in the Ottoman Empire, that's for sure. See the second paragraph", that's the issue, the paragraph (and its sources) nowhere says that we know for sure the place of origin of this sweet, it only says "Although the history of baklava is not well documented, its current form was probably developed in the imperial kitchens of the Topkapı Palace in Constantinople (now known in English as Istanbul).", thus, there is no need to give an undue weight to an Ottoman origin. Best.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:42, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I think the response from Uness232 was not the entirely correct. The problem is the "Place of origin". None knows where Baklava originated, but this is valid for the great majority of the dishes: however, it is a matter of fact that the first evidence of the existence of baklava in the form we know is in Topkapi Palace, Istanbul in the Ottoman age (third paragraph). The name is ottoman Turkish, and this is enough to write "ottoman empire" in the origin field, although, as I wrote above, this is misleading. It would be better to write "Attested for the first time" or something like that. Alex2006 (talk) 17:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

My point was to remove the place of origin from the infobox, which is obviously misleading for our readers, the discussion about the origins of the food is quite well dealt with in the relevant "history" section.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:13, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

It is the other way around: misleading is not what is written in the Infobox, but the history section. Everything written in the history section is, as we say in Italy, fried air. There, there is no mention of baklava, but of more or less similar dishes, which some try to pass off as the ancestors of baklava. Unfortunately, there is no proof that the dishes described in the history section (gastris, central Asia layered bread, placenta, etc.), which, mind you, are all very different from baklava, are its ancestors. What many do not realise is that the development of each new dish is not linear and progressive. It is not a technological product like an integrated circuit where each generation derives from the previous one and foresees the next one. It may be that an ingenious confectioner invented baklava from scratch, or from something we don't know: we will never know, because we lack evidence. The only thing that is certain is that Baklava's name is Ottoman Turkish, that the dessert first appeared in Istanbul, in the Topkapi, and that the Janissaries used to give a tray of it to the sultan. This is the only true facts we have, all the others are more or less guesswork. If a Persian cookbook from the 13th century will be discovered tomorrow with a recipe for baklava, then we can write: Origin: Persian empire. that's how the history of gastronomy works. The same applies to the vast majority of dishes, i.e. all those that were not invented by a person who went to the trouble of handing down the recipe by writing that he/she was the inventor. Alex2006 (talk) 18:02, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Maybe i got you wrong, but if not, then i have to disagree with you. In the history section, the claims that some foods are ancestors of Baklava are reliably sourced, thus, it's not our business to comment what the sources say, but it's our duty to go with what they say, you probably know this as well as me, if not better than me, given that you've been editing here for much more time than me. ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:16, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I do have to say that I've acted with too much haste when reverting your edit, and unfortunately do not have the energy to participate in this discussion. I apologize for this; if a consensus is reached here, do revert my revert without asking me. Uness232 (talk) 23:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hallo Wikaviani, certainly we work with sources (otherwise it would be OR), but no source states with certainty that baklava is derived from one of the dishes mentioned, and it cannot even do so, because evidence is lacking. In the case of this article then, if you read carefully, you can see that the history section is full of references to primary sources (which is forbidden in wikipedia), personal statements, and "probably," "maybe," etc. The main point, however, is another, and that is that the ~"origin" field denotes the region of the earth where the dish in question first emerged in the form we know from the mists of history, and is attested with certainty. And in the case of Baklava it is Istanbul at the time of the Ottomans (and the sources say so). Exactly as in the case of pizza the origin is Naples in the eighteenth-nineteenth century, but following your reasoning one would have to take Naples out of the field of origin because in this case one can go back as far as the fertile crescent (and with much more evidence to support it than in the case of baklava).

To sum up: "Origin" => first certain evidence of the dish. "History" => theories about the dish's supposed "ancestors", NOT the dish itself. Alex2006 (talk) 06:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

The problem is that the sources claiming that food X or Y are ancestors of Baklava seem stronger than the ones claiming that the current form of baklava originated in the Ottoman Empire, i don't have access to the Perry source, but the other source is unreadable and not a food historian. I know Gil Marks, for example, who is a food historian and who claims that Lausinaj is an ancestor of Baklava, while the sources claiming a Topkapi palace origin are not, as far as i can see.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:26, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Whatever its ultimate origins, all the sources seem to agree that the modern baklava was developed in the Ottoman Empire, probably in the imperial kitchens. Yes, there are sources supporting the hypotheses that lausinaj or plakous are ancestors of baklava, but they don't claim that they are baklava. --Macrakis (talk) 14:32, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Ancestors are just that: antecedents or predecessors, and not at all implicitly the same thing. E.g. monkeys are the ancestors of humans, but we're not the same animal. Or, as mentioned above, all things bready in the Mediterranean are ultimately descendants of the first bready thing cooked in Mesopotamia. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:40, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I guess you guys got me wrong, i didn't say that monkeys are humans or baklava's ancestors are baklava (come on ! seriously ?), i just removed the place of origin of baklava from the infobox since said place of origin is not known with enough certainty. Macrakis, if it was certain that the current form of baklava originated in the sultan's palace, then where are the multiple high quality sources supporting that ? uh ? We just have two dodgy sources, the 16 and 17, the 16 that has no title, no publisher, and is not available for readers ... and the 17, written by two obscure people, Aysenur Akkaya and Banu Koc, who seem to be all but food historians ... looks pretty thin to me. It would be more correct to explain in the history section, that, as some sources from the article say, the earliest records about the modern version of baklava are related to the Topkapi palace and remove the place of origin of the food from the infobox ...---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 20:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

What is your problem with the Perry 1994 reference? The footnote was incorrectly formatted, but I've fixed that now. I don't know what you mean by "dodgy" and "not available for readers". It is a chapter in a very widely known scholarly book on Middle Eastern food. Perry also wrote the filo article in the Oxford Companion to Food, which supports this claim. I haven't read the Akkaya/Koc paper. --Macrakis (talk) 21:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

My problem is that the source is not available for readers, i mean that i cannot go on and read the relevant part of it about baklava. If charles Perry, who is a food historian, supports that baklava originated in the Topkapi palace, that's fair enough for me, but i cannot verify this.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Why can't you verify it? If you're seriously interested in Middle Eastern food history, you should already have it on your bookshelf. But if you don't, it is available new and used on Amazon; it's available at hundreds of libraries; it's even available to borrow for free online at archive.org. What more do you want?

Even if it were hard to get, it could still be a reliable source -- see WP:SOURCEACCESS. There is no requirement that reliable and verifiable sources be available for free on the Web. --Macrakis (talk) 21:46, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I am seriously interested in Middle Eastern food history (that's easy to check in my editing history), but it's not a reason to own any and single book about it. None of your links are allowing me to read the specific part of the book about baklava, i.e. the page 87, but if you say that this source explicitly says that modern baklava originated in the Topkapi palace, then it's ok for me and we're done here. ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:01, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

??? What do you mean "None of your links are allowing me to read the specific part of the book about baklava". Borrow the book online for free at Archive.org as I suggested and turn to page 87. Anyway, that isn't required for verifiability. There could be one paper copy of the book available only at a university library in Mumbai to which you do not have access, and that's still considered verifiable. --Macrakis (talk) 22:07, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't have an account at archive.org and i am not interested in registering there, thus, as i said, i cannot turn the pages and access the page 87 of the book, just try your link and check it by yourself. I know that some sources may not be accessible, that's why i said above that if you say that this source explicitly says that modern baklava originated in the Topkapi palace, then it's ok for me, so , if you can read the page 87 of the book, please confirm that it explicitly supports what the infobox says about the place or origin of baklava, if so, then we're done here. ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

If you refuse to use a research tool, you can hardly complain of lack of verifiability. --Macrakis (talk) 22:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't refuse anything, i just asked if you can confirm that the page 87 of this book supports the infobox claim, if you cannot do that for me, then i'll have to register and check it by myself.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I checked the page afther registering to the site, that's what it says "It is argued that baklava was the first layered pastry baked in an oven, but that the practice of making the layers of dough paper-thin was probably an innovation of the royal kitchens at the Topkapi Sarayi in the century or so afther the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople", thus, i don't see how this sentence supports that the modern form of baklava originated from the sultan's palace.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:43, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

That is clearly saying that the modern form of baklava, with the paper-thin dough layers, was probably invented at the Topkapı Sarayı. --Macrakis (talk) 22:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

No, this is your interpretation of what the source says, sounds WP:OR.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

What exactly are you claiming that that source doesn't say? --Macrakis (talk) 22:56, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Well, the source does not say that the modern form of baklava originated in the Topkapi palace, there is nowhere any definition of what "modern baklava" might be in the source, thus this is not sufficient to support the infobox's claim.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:10, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hallo Wikaviani, Macrakis, the OCF says it explicitly: "the paper-thin pastry we know today was probably an innovation of the Ottoman sultan's kitchens at Topkapi palace in Istanbul. There is an established connection between the Topkapi kitchens and baklava... ", and so on. The paper-thin pastry we know today is the modern baklava. I advise you also to read the article "Baklava" of the "The Oxford Companion to Sugar and Sweets", where the history of Baklava is described in great detail. Alex2006 (talk) 06:24, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, thank you very much ! that's all i wanted, a reliable source clearly stating that modern baklava is related to the Topkapi palace. Wish you a great rest of your day.---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC)