Talk:Taiwanese cuisine - Knowledge (XXG)

1332:

and yes "murky" does have negative connotation in my opinion. I would not want to eat something that's considered murky. Again, Horse Eye, this is a very minor wording edit. I am not sure why you would want to call Taiwanese food politically contentious but I stand by my original statement. The latter paragraphs explained: "Some object to the politically fraught inclusion of Taiwanese cuisine under the banner of regional Chinese food and point out that it is inaccurate....Taiwanese American cuisine is emerging as a full cuisine in its own right." - This is much better written and written in a neutral, it also explained why there may be political elements, this is sufficient already. We literally had the first sentence calling Taiwanese food as politically controversial without any sort of explanations in such strong wording...and may I also say, bad grammar, which I fixed.

1432:, under "explanation", I literally copied it for you...I am a bit shocked as to why you are very insistent on this. It is a small wording change Horse Eye. And yes, "All encyclopedic content on Knowledge (XXG) must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." first off, eater is not reliable, and given Hui-wen Hung is the only person to say "murky", it is not comprehensive and does not represent significant views form other reliable sources. Lastly, the statement is only the author's opinion and as per NPOV we must separate opinion from facts. Hope this makes sense. Do we have a consensus now? 1090:

international (global fusions plus modern innovations like bubble tea). So it's a sweeping claim to say Taiwanese cuisine overall is authentic Chinese cuisine when a big portion of it, is actually partially Western fusion and more recent innovations. If you present someone who is not an expert and let them make a shoddy opinion. People will be misled into thinking that Taiwan is the only place that still has ancient practises on Chinese food when it's not that true and heavily outdated stereotyping. It makes it sound like every legit Taiwanese cooks are just stuck in the past and unwilling to create contemporary dishes and fusions. The opinion is just wrong at so many levels.

1051:

needed context that the Taiwanese cooks argued it was authentic Chinese only because they had followed their ancestral Chinese cooking traditions. Also other states like Singapore, Thailand, China have also continued real Chinese culinary cultural traditions to this modern day as well. That opinion piece has a snobbish tone as if everybody else is doing it wrong. Opinion shouldn't mislead. When you give an opinion, it needs to NOT give the false impression that other countries don't have traditional Chinese cooking. If they are the only place in the entire world that still has traditional Chinese cooking. Then 'preserve" would be more deserving and less likely to mislead.

1414:"WP:NPOV explains that we should avoid opinions and non-judgmental language" not it doesn't. Again if you want to re-write this and attribute murky to Hui-wen Hung you can, if you want to attribute the politically controversial nature to eater you can... But you can't not cover those significant points of view just because you don't agree with them. "All encyclopedic content on Knowledge (XXG) must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." 1317:

vibrant and murky. If you've never come across the idea that food can be politically contentious I would suggest that you read Food Politics and The Politics of Food, both are good primers for the area. The authors tone doesn't appear to be negative and even if it were that wouldn't be a problem. The statement that Taiwanese food "is diverse with the best of every culture that has ever set foot on the island" wouldn't be supported by this source (or by basic logic, its not always the "best" part of a food culture which gets assimilated thats a really simplistic view of history).

247: 404: 627: 301: 837: 280: 394: 373: 909:, like many others of her generation, argued that Taiwanese cuisine properly preserved authentic Chinese culinary traditions", then moving this section up and create a separate section under "History and Development". Do you both agree? I want to clarify that I DID NOT erase what you wrote. I used the same source, moved it up and expressed my reasoning. Can we reach consensus on this sentence? 207: 238: 509: 1302:

However, we should instead word it as the fact Taiwanese food - is diverse with the best of every culture that has ever set foot on the island. This is all I am getting at, I am sure you will agree my edits really removed the negativity. This is ultimately a very minor edit. If you have other ideas I am willing to see how we could come to a consensus.

499: 478: 1585:"murky" appeared in A Culinary History of Taipei? I remember offering to review the text for relevance and that is all I appear to have done. You will find A Culinary History of Taipei make the claim that it is not possible to divorce history from politics in the context of Taiwanese cuisine, does that surprise you? 1130:

appropriate. Also her opinion is highly political so it's not even a neutral pov and we already know that she can't be correct. Authentic Chinese food like Mapo Tofu is found in China. She is too sweepingly claiming that China doesn't have authentic Chinese food despite that is just factually pants on fire wrong.

1399:

How about you let me re-write this? I will include the fact Taiwanese food has roots from other cuisines (such as Japanese, Chinese, Western), but I will not include strong languages per my points above. Do you agree with this solution? Just so you know, I generally respect and appreciate your edits,

1391:

explains that we should avoid opinions and non-judgmental language, a quick search on the word "murky"'s meaning reveals: "dark and gloomy, especially due to thick mist", "(of liquid) dark and dirty; not clear". This violates WP:NPOV. NPOV also says to "Avoid stating opinions as facts." As such, I do

1301:

If I had to guess, the "politically contentious" statement she might be referring to, could be how Taiwanese food is a diverse mix of all cultures, which include Japanese, Chinese (southern Fujian), Chinese (other provinces), and Western. Therefore, some people may claim Taiwanese food as unoriginal.

1480:

We prefer nonjudgemental langage, per NPOV "Prefer nonjudgmental language. A neutral point of view neither sympathizes with nor disparages its subject (or what reliable sources say about the subject), although this must sometimes be balanced against clarity. Present opinions and conflicting findings

1446:

I will also mention under NPOV an example was given, "an article should not state that "genocide is an evil action" but may state that "genocide has been described by John So-and-so as the epitome of human evil." This is exactly what was done by the editor by directly stating Taiwanese food as murky

1331:

Sorry. I disagree. You will find I agree with most of your edits but this isn't one of them (I don't think you were the editor? Your edits are generally high quality). Calling a type of cuisine "politically contentious" is something that will require reliable and better sources (which Eater is not),

1129:

Lol that opinion is still factually wrong. And as per the Knowledge (XXG):Reliable sources and undue weight - you are not supposed to give so much weight to a singular opinion especially when it's of a very large complex topic. You can put that paragraph into her own wiki article. That would be more

1050:

The claim - "properly preserved authentic Chinese cuisine". What does it even mean? If people now make modern Chinese dishes with new ingredients not found in ancient China. Does that recipe no longer become 'authentic' Chinese? Culture is not static but always evolving and changing. I added in much

1316:

Murky appears to be pulled directly from the source but "consisted of the editor's own words" is exactly how Knowledge (XXG) is supposed to be... Directly copying from the source isn't allowed. Murky doesn't have negative connotations like that, there is absolutely no reason something can't be both

1018:

So interesting how many figures of speech assume maleness. :) Because of the assumption that people on the internet (and specifically administrators here on WP) are male, it can be perceived as a bit offensive. :) I try not to take offense. :) But, yeah, don't assume you're talking to a male. FWIW,

1368:

The author the of the eater article doesn't need to provide justification, its not our place to question WP:RS. You can add sources or viewpoints, but removing them is a problem. Even if we personally consider them incorrect if a viewpoint is covered by WP:RS we should also be covering it... Thats

1297:

As for sentences regarding "Local and international Taiwanese cuisine, including its history, is a politically contentious topic." - it wasn't clear what's contentious about. The Eater article (which itself, is sort of a blog post) discussed Taiwan's political situation being contentious, which is

1395:

That being said, I do acknowledge that Hui-wen Hung, author of 2018’s A Culinary History of Taipei, being a reliable source and the author did call it "murky". But aside from this, an internet search reveals the author being the only person to ever use the word, so to apply that this one specific

1089:

My key take is that a singular Taiwanese cook isn't an authority on what can be termed as authentic Chinese food or can be the sole voice on what Taiwanese cuisine is. So her opinion shouldn't be here in the article. Also Taiwanese food in comparison to Mainland Chinese food, is a great deal more

1631:

We don't use the book as a source, we use the Eater article which quotes Katy Hung directly: " “Taiwanese food history is as murky as Taiwanese politics,” says Katy Hui-wen Hung, author of 2018’s A Culinary History of Taipei. Indeed, it’s hard to talk food without getting political around here."

1277:

unsupported? The linked article talks a great deal about how politically contentious it is. "Taiwanese“Taiwanese food history is as murky as Taiwanese politics,” says Katy Hui-wen Hung, author of 2018’s A Culinary History of Taipei. Indeed, it’s hard to talk food without getting political around

1584:

You made a bold edit, I reverted it based on a clearly explained policy based reason (NPOV). If you're accusing me of violating BRD it would suggest that you don't understand BRD. There is no "aligned" we are neither to sympathize with or disparage. Can you direct me to where I claimed the word

1353:

If you like, I can remove the Eater article and cite better sources on why Taiwanese food is vibrant, diverse, and full of history, I think this will allow us to reach consensus, as there will not be such strong language but also acknowledge Taiwanese food's roots from other cuisines (such as

1335:

Secondly, note the author of the eater article purposely avoided discussing why and how Taiwanese food is "murky" or "political contentious", without proper justification of her statement and reasoning, it is inappropriate to directly source her opinion on Knowledge (XXG) as I whole heartedly

1217:

So many things wrong with that edit. I disagree with the statement claiming that Taiwan is the place that has the best Japanese food outside Japan. It is puffery or peacock statement to make such a bold extreme claim particularly when it's being made by a single writer in a Taiwan business

1616:

if the book does not reference the word "murky", then we must remove it. Like my original edit suggests, we can change it to diverse or other wording. I agree with your political view. But it seems to me "murky" is unsourced. I will make the change if you agree as Katy Hung never said it.

1278:

here." "Taiwan is at a political crossroads, one that makes for a unique cuisine that’s rich and complex, steeped in historical lore and brimming with political landmines." "Of course, like everything else in Taiwan, the force behind these recent movements is partly political." etc

1373:

means, both of those statements are neutral. The best you can hope for in terms of the Eater piece is that we attribute it so its no longer in Wikivoice. I also have the book (A Culinary History of Taipei) whose author is the start of the piece, I can review it if you'd like.

1293:

I just think the language was badly written and consisted of the editor's own words (whoever edited it). Hence you notice I replace word "Murky" with "diverse". I think you'd agree the word "murky" has negative connotation that should not be used on Taiwan's vibrant food

1465:

You also did not reply regarding my argument that non-judgmental language is not allowed by Knowledge (XXG). Upon the above reasons, I remain committed to my original stance and believe we should keep this version of edits. Please let me know if we reached consensus.

1646:

I am actually okay with the current version now. Notice after my edits, the introduction reads much better and neutral compared to its original state, it is further strengthened by more reliable source. I am glad we can come to consensus and thanks for a lively

1544:. If your reversion is met with another bold effort, then you should consider not reverting, but discussing. The talk page is open to all editors, not just bold ones. The first person to start a discussion is the person who is best following BRD. 1549:

I am going to let you revert because I will be making changes, but please note I am quite disappointed at your unilateral revert (as you have just violated BRD) and I thought we are generally aligned on Taiwanese-related issues. Guess

945:

Thank you. I apologize that we got off the wrong start by reverting each other. I appreciate your patience during this whole discussion and glad that we came to a conclusion that is feasible. HEB, would you be okay with the proposed

1481:

in a disinterested tone. Do not editorialize. When editorial bias towards one particular point of view can be detected the article needs to be fixed. The only bias that should be evident is the bias attributed to the source."

1527:

I am going to re-write it. You may have your own views but you can't deny my arguments above were equally as valid. After that, you can review the edits, see if it meets your standards. However, please note BDR said:

153: 976:

I want to thank you both for settling this like gentlemen. The requested edit has been made and I'm glad we came to consensus. HEB, I can help you with culinary nationalism and let's make this article better!

1218:"promotional" magazine. According to a Japanese expert food subscription, Taiwan doesn't even make it to their top ten countries for Japanese food so it's not even that factual nor a food expert consensus. 1215:

Taiwan, in particularly Taipei, is regarded as having some of the best Japanese food outside of Japan. This is due to the legacy of Japanese colonialism as well as ongoing cultural and commercial exchange.

1599:"And because Taiwan's food history cannot be divorced from its political history, it is only natural that the cuisine's conventions and boundaries should be as fluid and blurry as the island's status." 849: 190: 962:

I would like a little expansion so that we can actually address the core issue of culinary nationalism but this is a good starting point and I think that a dedicated history section is a good idea.

355: 776:

project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects,

1743: 1758: 345: 1004:

Thanks for disclosing your personal info. Let me rephrase: I thank you both for acting civilized. I hope you do not feel offended by the assumption of your gender, it was just figure of speech.

1298:

fine, but did not specify how the food could be somehow "politically contentious". I have actually never heard of this theory to be honest. I also do not like the negative tone of the author.

790: 1763: 755: 614: 321: 1339:

Again, this is a very very very minor edit. I am willing to listen to your ideas and reach consensus, but it seems like even such a minor change could turn into a big debate here...

1733: 1753: 308: 285: 147: 1191: 569: 251: 1788: 1748: 559: 777: 198: 784: 79: 1793: 1728: 535: 1570:

I did a search on "A Culinary History of Taipei", but I did not find the word "murky". Since you say you own the book, can you direct me which page it is?

460: 1537:

BRD is never a reason for reverting. Unless the reversion is supported by policies, guidelines or common sense, the reversion is not part of BRD cycle.

44: 1783: 85: 1773: 1738: 450: 637: 522: 483: 1236: 1161: 1124: 971: 1661:

If you say so, for me it looks more or less the same with perhaps a little less concision. I appreciate you finding the additional article.

1020:

Gadgets turn on Navigation popups, which will allow you to hover over a username and if the editor has specified their gender, it will say.

1778: 30: 426: 99: 1495:

Correct! Do we have consensus to leave this article the way it is now? Thank you for your understanding and the lively discussion.

104: 20: 1768: 1565: 856: 194: 168: 74: 1723: 417: 378: 260: 135: 65: 1670: 1641: 1608: 1594: 1522: 1490: 1423: 1383: 1326: 1072:

This page has undergone some criticism and changes. I do not want to start another edit war, do you have any feedback here?

534:

related articles on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

1336:

disagree unless there is compelling reasons why such negative sentiment should be applied to the entire cuisine history.

1199: 1534:

BRD is not a valid excuse for reverting good-faith efforts to improve a page simply because you don't like the changes.

1184: 766: 1666: 1637: 1604: 1590: 1518: 1486: 1419: 1400:

and you will find most of our edits are in alignment, I don't want this small wording edit to stop our collaboration.

1379: 1322: 1283: 1157: 1120: 967: 1219: 1232: 1081: 1060: 206: 185: 129: 109: 868: 808: 217: 1287: 266: 125: 1180:

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

1195: 1224: 1139: 985: 1662: 1633: 1613: 1600: 1586: 1514: 1482: 1415: 1375: 1318: 1279: 1153: 1135: 1116: 1098: 1067: 1056: 963: 175: 55: 1447:(which is what I was telling you in the first place). You cannot do that as specifically pointed out by 1228: 425:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

320:

on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

905:

Okay I have self-reverted as you both requested. But I propose this: "According to the Taiwanese chef,

70: 1396:

individual's opinion/statement and directly cites it on Knowledge (XXG) is not fair nor comprehensive.

1652: 1622: 1575: 1555: 1500: 1471: 1456: 1437: 1405: 1359: 1344: 1307: 1252: 1131: 1094: 1077: 1052: 1009: 981: 951: 914: 1149: 237: 161: 762: 1656: 1626: 1559: 1504: 1441: 1409: 1348: 1311: 1025: 995: 936: 874: 222: 141: 1566:

https://www.google.ca/books/edition/A_Culinary_History_of_Taipei/8RBqDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1

660: 626: 51: 24: 1448: 1429: 1388: 1370: 1112: 889: 870: 836: 219: 1510: 1145: 1648: 1618: 1571: 1551: 1496: 1467: 1452: 1433: 1401: 1355: 1340: 1303: 1269: 1248: 1073: 1005: 977: 947: 910: 1108: 1144:

If you have other opinions you are welcome to add them, I also think you need to review

719: 1717: 1176:

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

1091: 1021: 991: 932: 409: 317: 685: 393: 372: 300: 279: 1531:

BRD is not a justification for imposing one's own view or for tendentious editing.

1046:"Preserved" can be misleading as if they're the only place to have Chinese cuisine 745: 514: 1247:

This sentence is fine. It says "some of the best", it didn't say "the best". -

906: 504: 399: 872: 221: 1221:

so many things wrong with it - Undue, npov, unreliable source and puffery.

689: 1579: 1475: 1460: 1363: 1256: 1240: 1203: 1102: 1029: 1013: 999: 955: 940: 923:

I have no objection to this, in principle. As far as I'm concerned you can

918: 1152:

as you don't appear to understand how those concepts apply to wikipedia.

313: 1509:

This is nearly the exact opposite of what you've argued. We can follow

508: 697: 422: 761:

Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review

741: 723: 693: 677: 673: 669: 531: 749: 715: 681: 665: 527: 498: 477: 1513:

but that would mean leaving the article as it originally was.

1354:

Japanese, Chinese, Western), do you agree with this solution?

875: 830: 231: 223: 15: 1115:

we can't exclude it. See if you like the new wording better.

1540:

BRD is not an excuse to revert any change more than once.

927:

this and create a section. I want to further discuss any

1744:

Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles in Everyday life

1275: 1045: 604: 599: 594: 589: 330:

Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism

160: 1542:

This applies equally to bold editors and to reverters

931:

of content, though. Let's wait for HEB to weigh in.

526:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 421:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 312:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 1759:

High-importance Veganism and Vegetarianism articles

174: 1092:https://www.taiwanembassy.org/se_en/post/1613.html 785:Category:Knowledge (XXG) requested images of food 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 1764:WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism articles 1734:Knowledge (XXG) vital articles in Everyday life 333:Template:WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism 1190:Participate in the deletion discussion at the 883:This page has archives. Sections older than 8: 1754:B-Class Veganism and Vegetarianism articles 1222: 577: 544:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Food and drink 472: 367: 274: 1789:High-importance Food and drink articles 1749:B-Class vital articles in Everyday life 1107:Her opinion gets feature coverage in a 474: 369: 276: 235: 1729:Knowledge (XXG) level-5 vital articles 893:when more than 5 sections are present. 309:WikiProject Veganism and Vegetarianism 7: 520:This article is within the scope of 415:This article is within the scope of 306:This article is within the scope of 1794:WikiProject Food and drink articles 783:Provide photographs and images for 634:Here are some tasks you can do for 547:Template:WikiProject Food and drink 336:Veganism and Vegetarianism articles 265:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 435:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Taiwan 14: 1564:Hello Horse Eye, quick question: 1392:not believe your argument stands. 887:may be automatically archived by 50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome! 835: 789:Consider joining this project's 625: 507: 497: 476: 402: 392: 371: 299: 278: 245: 236: 205: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 1784:B-Class Food and drink articles 811:from the project's tasks pages. 754:Participate in project-related 564:This article has been rated as 455:This article has been rated as 350:This article has been rated as 1774:Top-importance Taiwan articles 1739:B-Class level-5 vital articles 774:{{WikiProject Food and drink}} 1: 1204:06:38, 2 September 2022 (UTC) 1030:18:32, 24 February 2022 (UTC) 1014:18:22, 24 February 2022 (UTC) 1000:18:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC) 986:17:26, 24 February 2022 (UTC) 972:17:18, 24 February 2022 (UTC) 956:17:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC) 941:17:09, 24 February 2022 (UTC) 919:17:05, 24 February 2022 (UTC) 538:and see a list of open tasks. 429:and see a list of open tasks. 324:and see a list of open tasks. 42:Put new text under old text. 1257:14:54, 6 November 2022 (UTC) 1241:07:02, 6 November 2022 (UTC) 1779:WikiProject Taiwan articles 1019:you can in Preferences: --> 438:Template:WikiProject Taiwan 1810: 638:WikiProject Food and drink 612:To edit this page, select 570:project's importance scale 523:WikiProject Food and drink 461:project's importance scale 356:project's importance scale 327:Veganism and Vegetarianism 286:Veganism and Vegetarianism 1162:18:58, 4 March 2022 (UTC) 1140:17:49, 4 March 2022 (UTC) 1125:16:32, 4 March 2022 (UTC) 1103:19:22, 3 March 2022 (UTC) 1082:18:23, 3 March 2022 (UTC) 1061:17:10, 3 March 2022 (UTC) 581:Food and Drink task list: 576: 563: 492: 454: 387: 349: 294: 273: 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 1671:16:07, 14 May 2023 (UTC) 1657:00:53, 14 May 2023 (UTC) 1642:20:56, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1627:20:47, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1609:18:24, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1595:18:17, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1580:17:48, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1560:17:35, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1523:17:29, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1505:17:26, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1491:17:22, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1476:17:20, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1461:17:18, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1442:17:15, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1428:Yes it does, please see 1424:17:00, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1410:16:35, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1384:16:04, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1364:16:01, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1349:15:58, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1327:14:49, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1312:02:33, 13 May 2023 (UTC) 1288:21:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC) 769:to learn how to do this. 1769:B-Class Taiwan articles 550:Food and drink articles 1724:B-Class vital articles 1213:The section that says 807:Note: These lists are 732:articles currently at 706:articles currently at 654:Status or below up to 75:avoid personal attacks 1185:Taichung Sun Cake.JPG 791:Assessment task force 259:on Knowledge (XXG)'s 252:level-5 vital article 199:Auto-archiving period 100:Neutral point of view 990:FTR, I'm not a man. 756:deletion discussions 105:No original research 650:articles currently 1274:are you sure thats 1196:Community Tech bot 767:WP:Handling trivia 661:Agaricus bisporus 418:WikiProject Taiwan 261:content assessment 86:dispute resolution 47: 1614:@Horse Eye's Back 1243: 1227:comment added by 897: 896: 862: 861: 829: 828: 825: 824: 821: 820: 817: 816: 804: 803: 664:(i.e. mushroom), 646:Help bring these 471: 470: 467: 466: 366: 365: 362: 361: 230: 229: 66:Assume good faith 43: 25:Taiwanese cuisine 1801: 1663:Horse Eye's Back 1634:Horse Eye's Back 1601:Horse Eye's Back 1587:Horse Eye's Back 1515:Horse Eye's Back 1483:Horse Eye's Back 1416:Horse Eye's Back 1376:Horse Eye's Back 1319:Horse Eye's Back 1280:Horse Eye's Back 1273: 1229:Simpleshooter999 1209:Japanese cuisine 1154:Horse Eye's Back 1117:Horse Eye's Back 1071: 1068:Horse Eye's Back 964:Horse Eye's Back 900:discussion redux 892: 876: 853: 852: 839: 831: 812: 629: 621: 620: 578: 552: 551: 548: 545: 542: 517: 512: 511: 501: 494: 493: 488: 480: 473: 443: 442: 439: 436: 433: 412: 407: 406: 405: 396: 389: 388: 383: 375: 368: 338: 337: 334: 331: 328: 303: 296: 295: 290: 282: 275: 258: 249: 248: 241: 240: 232: 224: 210: 209: 200: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 16: 1809: 1808: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1800: 1799: 1798: 1714: 1713: 1267: 1265: 1211: 1192:nomination page 1178: 1065: 1048: 902: 888: 877: 871: 844: 813: 806: 800: 797:in this section 730:High Importance 630: 609: 566:High-importance 549: 546: 543: 540: 539: 513: 506: 487:High‑importance 486: 441:Taiwan articles 440: 437: 434: 431: 430: 408: 403: 401: 381: 352:High-importance 335: 332: 329: 326: 325: 289:High‑importance 288: 256: 246: 226: 225: 220: 197: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 1807: 1805: 1797: 1796: 1791: 1786: 1781: 1776: 1771: 1766: 1761: 1756: 1751: 1746: 1741: 1736: 1731: 1726: 1716: 1715: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1707: 1706: 1705: 1704: 1703: 1702: 1701: 1700: 1699: 1698: 1697: 1696: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1692: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1688: 1687: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1597: 1568: 1547: 1546: 1545: 1538: 1535: 1532: 1397: 1393: 1337: 1333: 1299: 1295: 1264: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1210: 1207: 1188: 1187: 1177: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1047: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 960: 959: 958: 901: 898: 895: 894: 882: 879: 878: 873: 869: 867: 864: 863: 860: 859: 846: 845: 840: 834: 827: 826: 823: 822: 819: 818: 815: 814: 805: 802: 801: 799: 798: 787: 781: 770: 759: 752: 726: 720:French cuisine 704:Top Importance 700: 648:Top Importance 643: 632: 631: 624: 619: 618: 608: 607: 602: 597: 592: 586: 583: 582: 574: 573: 562: 556: 555: 553: 541:Food and drink 536:the discussion 519: 518: 502: 490: 489: 484:Food and drink 481: 469: 468: 465: 464: 457:Top-importance 453: 447: 446: 444: 427:the discussion 414: 413: 397: 385: 384: 382:Top‑importance 376: 364: 363: 360: 359: 348: 342: 341: 339: 322:the discussion 304: 292: 291: 283: 271: 270: 264: 242: 228: 227: 218: 216: 215: 212: 211: 181: 180: 118: 117: 113: 112: 107: 102: 93: 92: 90: 89: 82: 77: 68: 62: 60: 59: 48: 39: 38: 35: 34: 28: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1806: 1795: 1792: 1790: 1787: 1785: 1782: 1780: 1777: 1775: 1772: 1770: 1767: 1765: 1762: 1760: 1757: 1755: 1752: 1750: 1747: 1745: 1742: 1740: 1737: 1735: 1732: 1730: 1727: 1725: 1722: 1721: 1719: 1672: 1668: 1664: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1654: 1650: 1645: 1644: 1643: 1639: 1635: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1624: 1620: 1615: 1612: 1611: 1610: 1606: 1602: 1598: 1596: 1592: 1588: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1577: 1573: 1569: 1567: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1557: 1553: 1548: 1543: 1539: 1536: 1533: 1530: 1529: 1526: 1525: 1524: 1520: 1516: 1512: 1508: 1507: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1494: 1493: 1492: 1488: 1484: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1473: 1469: 1464: 1463: 1462: 1458: 1454: 1450: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1439: 1435: 1431: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1421: 1417: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1407: 1403: 1398: 1394: 1390: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1381: 1377: 1372: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1361: 1357: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1338: 1334: 1330: 1329: 1328: 1324: 1320: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1309: 1305: 1300: 1296: 1292: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1285: 1281: 1276: 1271: 1262: 1258: 1254: 1250: 1246: 1245: 1244: 1242: 1238: 1234: 1230: 1226: 1220: 1216: 1208: 1206: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1193: 1186: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1175: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1142: 1141: 1137: 1133: 1128: 1127: 1126: 1122: 1118: 1114: 1110: 1106: 1105: 1104: 1100: 1096: 1093: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1069: 1063: 1062: 1058: 1054: 1031: 1027: 1023: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1011: 1007: 1003: 1002: 1001: 997: 993: 989: 988: 987: 983: 979: 975: 974: 973: 969: 965: 961: 957: 953: 949: 944: 943: 942: 938: 934: 930: 926: 922: 921: 920: 916: 912: 908: 904: 903: 899: 891: 886: 881: 880: 866: 865: 858: 855: 854: 851: 848: 847: 843: 838: 833: 832: 810: 796: 795:project ideas 792: 788: 786: 782: 779: 775: 771: 768: 764: 760: 757: 753: 751: 747: 743: 739: 736:status up to 735: 731: 727: 725: 721: 717: 713: 710:status up to 709: 705: 701: 699: 695: 691: 687: 683: 679: 675: 671: 667: 663: 662: 657: 653: 649: 645: 644: 641: 640: 639: 633: 628: 623: 622: 617: 616: 611: 610: 606: 603: 601: 598: 596: 593: 591: 588: 587: 585: 584: 580: 579: 575: 571: 567: 561: 558: 557: 554: 537: 533: 529: 525: 524: 516: 510: 505: 503: 500: 496: 495: 491: 485: 482: 479: 475: 462: 458: 452: 449: 448: 445: 428: 424: 420: 419: 411: 410:Taiwan portal 400: 398: 395: 391: 390: 386: 380: 377: 374: 370: 357: 353: 347: 344: 343: 340: 323: 319: 318:vegetarianism 315: 311: 310: 305: 302: 298: 297: 293: 287: 284: 281: 277: 272: 268: 262: 254: 253: 243: 239: 234: 233: 214: 213: 208: 204: 196: 192: 189: 187: 183: 182: 177: 173: 170: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 127: 124: 123:Find sources: 120: 119: 111: 110:Verifiability 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 97: 96: 87: 83: 81: 78: 76: 72: 69: 67: 64: 63: 57: 53: 52:Learn to edit 49: 46: 41: 40: 37: 36: 32: 26: 22: 18: 17: 1541: 1266: 1263:Unsupported? 1223:— Preceding 1214: 1212: 1189: 1179: 1064: 1049: 928: 924: 884: 841: 794: 773: 737: 733: 729: 728:Bring these 711: 707: 703: 702:Bring these 686:Ham and eggs 659: 655: 651: 647: 636: 635: 613: 565: 521: 456: 416: 351: 307: 267:WikiProjects 250: 202: 184: 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 1647:discussion. 890:ClueBot III 809:transcluded 793:. List any 778:select here 746:Burger King 515:Food portal 148:free images 31:not a forum 1718:Categories 1649:Kazuha1029 1619:Kazuha1029 1572:Kazuha1029 1552:Kazuha1029 1497:Kazuha1029 1468:Kazuha1029 1453:Kazuha1029 1434:Kazuha1029 1402:Kazuha1029 1356:Kazuha1029 1341:Kazuha1029 1304:Kazuha1029 1270:Kazuha1029 1249:Kazuha1029 1150:WP:NEUTRAL 1132:Soyegg2417 1095:Soyegg2417 1074:Kazuha1029 1053:Soyegg2417 1006:Kazuha1029 978:Kazuha1029 948:Kazuha1029 911:Kazuha1029 907:Fu Pei-mei 857:Archive 1 763:WP:Trivia 690:Soy sauce 658:status: 255:is rated 88:if needed 71:Be polite 21:talk page 1294:history. 1237:contribs 1225:unsigned 1022:valereee 992:valereee 933:valereee 842:Archives 772:Add the 740:status: 714:status: 314:veganism 186:Archives 56:get help 29:This is 27:article. 1449:WP:NPOV 1430:WP:NPOV 1389:WP:NPOV 1371:WP:NPOV 1113:WP:NPOV 1111:so per 946:change? 929:removal 885:90 days 595:history 568:on the 459:on the 354:on the 257:B-class 203:90 days 154:WP refs 142:scholar 1511:WP:BRD 1146:WP:POV 698:Yogurt 432:Taiwan 423:Taiwan 379:Taiwan 263:scale. 126:Google 1369:what 1109:WP:RS 850:Index 742:Apple 724:Sugar 694:Sushi 678:Drink 674:Curry 670:Bread 605:purge 600:watch 532:drink 244:This 191:Index 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 1667:talk 1653:talk 1638:talk 1623:talk 1605:talk 1591:talk 1576:talk 1556:talk 1550:not. 1519:talk 1501:talk 1487:talk 1472:talk 1457:talk 1438:talk 1420:talk 1406:talk 1380:talk 1360:talk 1345:talk 1323:talk 1308:talk 1284:talk 1253:talk 1233:talk 1200:talk 1158:talk 1148:and 1136:talk 1121:talk 1099:talk 1078:talk 1057:talk 1026:talk 1010:talk 996:talk 982:talk 968:talk 952:talk 937:talk 915:talk 765:and 750:Fish 716:Beer 682:Food 666:Beef 615:here 590:edit 560:High 530:and 528:food 346:High 316:and 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 1194:. — 925:add 451:Top 176:TWL 1720:: 1669:) 1655:) 1640:) 1625:) 1607:) 1593:) 1578:) 1558:) 1521:) 1503:) 1489:) 1474:) 1459:) 1440:) 1422:) 1408:) 1382:) 1362:) 1347:) 1325:) 1310:) 1286:) 1255:) 1239:) 1235:• 1202:) 1160:) 1138:) 1123:) 1101:) 1080:) 1059:) 1028:) 1012:) 998:) 984:) 970:) 954:) 939:) 917:) 748:, 744:, 738:FA 734:GA 722:, 718:, 712:FA 708:GA 696:, 692:, 688:, 684:, 680:, 676:, 672:, 668:, 656:GA 642:: 201:: 193:, 156:) 54:; 1665:( 1651:( 1636:( 1621:( 1603:( 1589:( 1574:( 1554:( 1517:( 1499:( 1485:( 1470:( 1455:( 1451:. 1436:( 1418:( 1404:( 1378:( 1358:( 1343:( 1321:( 1306:( 1282:( 1272:: 1268:@ 1251:( 1231:( 1198:( 1156:( 1134:( 1119:( 1097:( 1076:( 1070:: 1066:@ 1055:( 1024:( 1008:( 994:( 980:( 966:( 950:( 935:( 913:( 780:. 758:. 652:B 572:. 463:. 358:. 269:: 195:1 188:: 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.