Ani medjool (talk | contribs) →Images: i make change |
Ani medjool (talk | contribs) →Images: i make change |
||
Line 426: | Line 426: | ||
:::It was actually invented in Italy, by a chef named Luigi Alfonzo Garbanzo, professionally known as L. Garbanzo. →[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]] 18:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC) |
:::It was actually invented in Italy, by a chef named Luigi Alfonzo Garbanzo, professionally known as L. Garbanzo. →[[User:Baseball Bugs|Baseball Bugs]] <sup>''[[User talk:Baseball Bugs|What's up, Doc?]]''</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Baseball_Bugs|carrots]] 18:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC) |
||
felafel is arab food not invent by italians or the jews. show me source that say italian invent it. nsaum75 i suggest you cease cry and cease play of traditional "poor me. poor jew" wolf call. nobody listen because they know the jew steal everything from us and rewrite history to degrade arab. i suggest you cease this vandalize of arab food by shoving you pro jew |
felafel is arab food not invent by italians or the jews. show me source that say italian invent it. nsaum75 i suggest you cease cry and cease play of traditional "poor me. poor jew" wolf call. nobody listen because they know the jew steal everything from us and rewrite history to degrade arab. i suggest you cease this vandalize of arab food by shoving you pro jew ajenda, which be antiarab by natural and deny culture of arab peoples. [[User:Ani medjool|Ani medjool]] ([[User talk:Ani medjool|talk]]) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 22:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
== Infobox available == |
== Infobox available == |
Revision as of 22:47, 30 September 2009
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Use of Palestine rather than Israel
In the historical context, Palestine is more correct, as Israel refers to the modern state. Do not revert it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.25.86 (talk) 18:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- I checked the source, it says "And the falafel itself keeps changing. The original Egyptian dish was made with fava beans; as falafel moved northward, cooks substituted chickpeas". Therefore, I removed references to Syria and Palestine and added Egypt. This makes it true to the source. --Nsaum75 (talk) 18:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Why was the reference to Syria and Palestine removed altogether? Is it because it failed to mention Israel? What the fuck, honestly. Stop touching the article! 124.169.25.86 (talk) 18:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- Ahh, sorry, I didn't see what you said before. Fair enough :] I'll just say, funny that it takes an "edit war" for an editor to realise the article contains details absent in the source, yet I get a warning saying my edit was not constructive. Why were Israel and Syria mentioned to begin with? It's all utter balls. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.25.86 (talk) 18:58, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Etymology
The dictionary says falafel means "little peppers" and that it's actually derived from latin "piper" meaning pepper.
- In Arabic, that would be filfil (فلفل) rather than falafel (فلافل); there is one more letter in the word falafel. --Khalid 22:24, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
- I've seen this etymology, however, in several dictionaries, such as the American Heritage Dictionary: "Arabic falāfil, pl. of filfil, pepper, probably from Sanskrit pippalī." I'm going to go ahead and add it. Unfortunately, I know neither Arabic nor Tamil. Lesgles 15:34, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
- What I've seen is falafel <(Eng) felafel < fulaful*, the plural of ful. This always made sense to me, since falafel was traditionally made from fava beans. --Mgreenbe 17:33, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- No, falafel is the plural of filfil, I don't know if ful has a plural but if it did it couldn't be falafel. Falafel is almost always in my experience made with chickpeas, which are called "hummus" in Arabic. By the way, falafel as street food is surely almost always a sandwich (in pita bread or otherwise?) I think there is a little redundancy in the current way this is phrased. Palmiro | Talk 21:42, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation! Redundancy fixed, good point. --Mgreenbe 09:05, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
- No, falafel is the plural of filfil, I don't know if ful has a plural but if it did it couldn't be falafel. Falafel is almost always in my experience made with chickpeas, which are called "hummus" in Arabic. By the way, falafel as street food is surely almost always a sandwich (in pita bread or otherwise?) I think there is a little redundancy in the current way this is phrased. Palmiro | Talk 21:42, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- What I've seen is falafel <(Eng) felafel < fulaful*, the plural of ful. This always made sense to me, since falafel was traditionally made from fava beans. --Mgreenbe 17:33, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Image
The image here is probably woo non-free, so it should be recreated. If someone can cook up a batch and take a picture that would be great (I can't find any in my local shops) — Zeimusu | Talk 03:31, 2005 Feb 13 (UTC)
- In this case I'll remove the link. When we will have a new picture we can add it again Matteo 14:01, 2005 Mar 9 (UTC)
Israeli and Arab falafel
This was bound to happen. I deleted 207.255.174.254's controversy section because it was poorly composed and (I may be POV here) inaccurate. I'm currently living in Israel and have never seen "Israeli falafel". There is, in fact a distinction between Israeli and Arab falafel -- I find the latter to be bigger and more richly spiced, often to the point of a piquant sourness. This might be something nice to mention.
No one in Israel is trying to say that Israelis/Jews invented falafel. In fact, my experience has shown that falafel (and pita, by the by) is seen as a uniting force, which brings many Israelis into the Arab communities and vice versa. I've yet to encounter 'dismay' on either side that the other eats falafel. I would be interested to see a source on the "dismay" and "theft" mentioned. --Mgreenbe 11:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
This is the person whose edits you have deleted. You claim that I appear biased in my edits. It seems amusing to me that you don't feel the same way about yourself, being a Jew. I'm not predjudiced agaisnt you or your people, but I am also not afraid to tell the truth. Many stores claim many Arabic foods as "Israeli". Imagine if someone marketed Haunukah as a Christian holiday. Don't tell me it wouldn't bother you. Calling Hummus and Falafel Israeli cusine is biased to begin with.
- Well, perhaps you should give a source for this. Wikipedia policy is that you should cite sources for your edits. While this is often ignored, it really is necessary if your edit is controversial. I've certainly heard Arabs complaining the odd time about falafel being described as Israeli food, but is this really a major controversy? After all, many Israelis are of Arab origin, being immigrants from Iraq, Egypt etc as well as native Palestinian Jews, and it's hardly surprising that they should keep their native cuisine. Palmiro | Talk 22:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Then why call it by a different name? Why give credit where it isnt due? and why, WHY is there an Israeli cusine section on wikipedia with a bunch of Palestinian foods, and why is there not a Palestinian cuisine section?
- I would like to see a source that Israelis call falafel by a different name. The modern Hebrew word comes from Arabic!
- Who's "giving credit"? The Israeli cuisine category includes all food popular enough in Israel to be considered a national food. It does not mean that Israel invented the food. According to the article, falafel may have originated in India -- should it not be listed as Middle Eastern cuisine?
- There isn't a Palestinian cuisine category on Wikipedia because no one has written it. Why don't you? I wouldn't be able to write too much about it, as my experience with Palestinian food is just with falafel (delicious) and the beer Taybeh (better than Goldstar!). Since many Palestinian foods with existing articles have entries in Wikipedia -- say, falafel :) -- the category could be quickly populated. If you create the category, I'll do research for a write-up on Taybeh. In fact, if I have free time later, I'll create the category and populate it as best I can. --Mgreenbe 11:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
- Actually, there is a Category:Palestinian cuisine, though it's not adequately populated! Please look harder before launching these accusations. Other Palestinian foods with articles: Mujaddara, arak (liqueur), shawarma, baklava, knafeh. Palmiro | Talk 18:19, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
- I didn't even think to check! Added what wasn't already in there. I'd never heard of knafeh; gotta go to Nablus! --Mgreenbe 23:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Nablus is largeley a destroyed battered city with dilapidated houses and broken spirits. One time they pioneered the delicious kinafa, now their lives are ruined after their land was stolen and their sons were killed. The joyful spirit of Palestinians is dead absorbed into the mist. Their hope is dead they don't want to make kinafa
Common guys, Falafel is no more "Israeli" food than Borscht is, both with obvious origins, in now Israel been such a community of immigrants it would be plain silly to claim 'inventing' such food. I think a more interesting fact, is the 'fussion' kitchen in Israel, notably about Falafel, the fact that one can buy Falafel with beetroot is probably such an example. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.84.24.136 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- No one claimed Israel invented falafel. It is "regarded there as a national food". It's true, it is regarded here as a national food; I had it for lunch and felt very patriotic. There are even postcards, "Falafel, the Israeli national food". I think the beetroot may be a Persian-Jewish innovation; I think they're also responsible for the beet-pickled eggplants, which are, might I add, incredibly delicious. Care to find out and post cited prose? --Mgreenbe 14:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
- Another Israeli innovation with their falafel that you don't traditionally find with Arab falafel is sauerkraut...maybe Yekkes, German Jewish immigrants to Israel started adding it? It's just food people, don't politicize it. And Israelis proclaiming it as a national dish doesn't mean that they are stealing it from Arabs. It just means it's the most popular street food in Israel. Turks and Greeks also eat falafel by the way, nobody accuses them of stealing it from the Arabs/Palestinians. Texan gringos are also into tacos and burritos, but made their own version of it...they haven't stolen Latino culture. And don't forget that more than half of the Israeli Jewish population are Jews from Arab countries, they also grew up with falafel...so stop with the BS about Israelis "stealing falafel from the Palestinians". It's a regional food of the Middel East and Meditteranean basin, and guess what...Israel is in that region (and there to stay) and most of its people have roots in that region!
In Italy pasta is a national food, it came from China. In Ireland potatoes are a national food, that came from South America (in some Jewish households potatoes are almost a national food. Blintzes are a typical Jewish food, but they came from Russia. --Brat32 21:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Indian falafel
I was surprised by that the first time I saw it. That was one long-lived piece of vandalism, if so - a bit scary! Palmiro | Talk 02:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Lebanese?
thats good that someone mentioned that the falafel brigns together the arabs and the jews.
but no one where does it mention anyhting about Lebanon. Lebanon is the ultimate falafel hub. falafel is typically known as lebanese food. we need some lebanese stuff on it.
yes israel has falafel but we need some arab country information on falafil —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.218.41.202 (talk • contribs) 10:13, 21 January 2006 UTC.
Best falafel in NYC, Bread from Beiruit on 45th St. If I also mentioned that Ess-a-Bagel has the best bagels, would that make it more POV?--129.252.176.46 21:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yep; but I'll check it out next time I'm in the City. There's also Azori (sp.) on the Upper West Side; the Jewish "falafel nazi". Supposed to be good, but don't take my word for it. --Mgreenbe 00:50, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- In NSW Australia the best falafel in Sydney is at Fatima's Lebanese Restaurant, Cleveland St, Surry Hills. While up the coast the best in NSW is Yami Falafel, Park St, Brunswick Heads which is an Israeli vegitarian resturant. Good food is one of the scarce foundations upon which to build peace. Don't let food become another battle ground—Dananimal 03:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
French fried potatoes, known as chips?
They're certainly not known by that name in Lebanon. Anywhere else? Palmiro | Talk 14:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Israel. Or, retrograde "chipsim". (Almost as hilarious as schnitzelim.) I think the sentence originally mentioned only Israel; when Lebanon and UAE were added, the user must not have noticed the clause. But regardless, in most of the world french fries are known as chips. I'll take it out. Out of curiousity, what are they called in Lebanon? --Mgreenbe 15:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Batata! or batata maqliyye, if necessary. I think most Lebanese would just call them potatoes in English, though I don't really know. It's very unusual to find potatoes cooked any other way in Syrian or Lebanese restaurants unless they are part of a stew or made dish.
- Are you sure people put za3tar on falafel? OK, it's not at the peanut butter-in-hummus level, but I've never heard of it, whereas sumac is always added here in Syria at least. And it's the wrong colour! Palmiro | Talk 15:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Batata? That's Hebrew for sweet potato. Makes some sense: the German/French "apple of the ground" (tapuach adama) took hold for potato, but Ben Yehuda would have stuck with the Arabic.
- I've seen it on shawarma, but never falafel; I was only correcting the extant link to sumac. --Mgreenbe 15:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- It looks to me like you changed the reference to sumac into one to za3tar. Did you mean to? As for schnitzelim, I seem to recall you remarking once that you didn't think it would be found in Levantine cuisine. And probably not as such, but we do have iskalúb bané in most restaurants - can you work it out? Palmiro | Talk 15:49, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah. I've never seen sumac used on its own in the Middle East and assumed the usage was a mistranslation (a very common one here in Israel). If you've seen sumac on falafel but not za`atar, we should just change it back. As for iskalup bané, the best I can get out of it is some sort of "scalloped" piece of meat. (I mention schnitzelim because it's a Hebrew plural on a german word; my German friends find it beyond ridiculous.) --Mgreenbe 16:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Anon user is right, in Lebanese use "batata" or "batata maqlyeh", even in menus they may use "french fries" but rarely "chips", because it refers to potato chips. CG 16:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
QUESTION ABOUT ETYMOLOGY:
Is it common to have a quadrilitiral root in Arabic made up of a doubling of a two letter root? Of course, there is FLFL and ZLZL, but are there many others? It seems to me that in Arabic this is rare whereas in Hebrew it is more frequent.
(David ; yishalom@sbcglobal.net)
Bedouin origin
My uncle works for the US Department of Agriculture and is quite familiar with the history of most foods including falafel. He says it's originally Egyptian. Some guy was wondering how they deep fried back then. To this day and age, some people in the middle east deep fry in large pots without electricity the same way that they wash their clothes. (unsigned post)
- Yes, falafel is usually considered Egyptian (though that is hard to prove). And of course there is deep-frying without electricity -- that's not the issue. The issue is that bedouins are nomads. Deep-frying is not a typical cooking technique for nomads. It is more likely that it is a city vendor's snack in origin. Anyway, if it's not {{dubious}}, it is at least {{fact}} because no source is given for this theory. --Macrakis 02:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, up until the late eighties, we still did deep frying in Lebanon the way I described it. Up to this day, there are still plenty of people in the villages who still do so. And considering bedouins to this day still cook this way, and most historians agree that the falafel is quite old, then the fact that it is deep-fried today using an electric stove has no bearing on how it was cooked a long time ago. It could have been deep-fried then the old way, or it could have been baked and evolved over time for efficiency. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.48.69.100 (talk) 03:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC).
- Could you please re-read what I said? Electricity has nothing to do with it, and of course there are people in villages who deep-fry. Villagers are not nomads. But what evidence is there that falafel is of Egyptian bedouin origin? A source is needed. --Macrakis 13:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Falafel Link
To whom it may concern, I have read the article about falafel before and was interested in trying to make it. I never got it to taste right and wasted time and money on igredients trying. I wanted to help others who after reading your article also want to try falafel. So I decided to make a website offering a Falafel Kit. The kit contains a dry mix that has a traditional mid-east recipe and allows others to make falafel very easily without trying to mix all kinds of ingredients. It also allows others to get a true taste of the mid-eastern food. I would like to link my site WWW.FalafelKits.COM to the falafel page. I will also add a Wikipedia-Falafel link to my site.
Thank you for you time, FalafelKits 00:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- We don't present commercial links on Wikipedia. Sorry.--C.Logan 01:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Removed "History" section
In the interest of WP:NPOV I have removed the "History" section. First, it seems duplicated with the "Cultural" section and second, it looked entirely based on the actions of a confirmed sockpuppetteer POV pusher who was causing trouble on many food-related articles. M1rth (talk) 22:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I srongly object to you removal of this information which I have restored. It does not duplicated information anywhere in the article. I added it myself and it's based directly on the source cited. Please articulate a reason in line with Wikipedia policies or guidelines as to why this information is not relevant to this article. Claiming that "anti-Israel" "sockpuppets" added it, does not constitute one. Particularly since it is not even true. Tiamuttalk 09:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Gilabrand, please stop changing the text to read as you wish it did, rather than what the reliable sources cited actually state. WP:NPOV does not mean replacing text that you find offensive with text than you think is "neutral". It means reporting what reliable sources say and attributing the varied viewpoints to them. As such, I have restored this paragraph:
Orna Agmon has compared the history of falafel to that of the sabra, the local prickly fruit that Palestinians ate for centuries before Israelis started using the word as a nickname for native-born Israelis. Ammiel Alcalay, a Jewish professor of Middle Eastern culture, similarly believes that "it's total appropriation," and that Israelis have claimed falafel in the same way that they have Jaffa oranges and the spice mixture zaatar.
Your version which read:
The history of falafel has been compared to that of the sabra, the local prickly fruit that local residents ate for centuries before the word became a nickname for native-born Israelis. Ammiel Alcalay, a Jewish professor of Middle Eastern culture, similarly believes that Israelis have claimed falafel in the same way that they have Jaffa oranges and the spice mixture zaatar.
changed ther meaning of the text completely, so as to imply that there was no cultural appropriation involved, when Alcalay and Agmon are quite clear that in their opinion, there was. Tiamuttalk 11:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, I will "neutralize" the texts, so that they are encyclopedic - or they won't be used here. You are adding contentious material deliberately. Now that certain editors have been blocked indefinitely, perhaps now is the time to rethink whether efforts to politicize this article are worth your while.--Gilabrand (talk) 11:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Gilabrand, you are doing it again, and without even discussing. The article explains a lot of varied viewpoints on the falafel debate. These need to be attributed to their owners. Instead of deleting or changing the viewpoints you think are unapaltable from those provided by the source says, why not add other viewpoints? For example: you can add something from this section:
Jewish and Israeli attitudes toward the falafel debate range from defiance to ambivalence to outright shame — just as they do toward the conflict at large. Some Jews point out that no single group can own a method for frying a mush of legumes; they say that falafel is generically Middle Eastern, having originated in Egypt and found its way as far as Morocco and Saudi Arabia. "Have we stolen pasta from the Italians?" asked Geoffrey Weill, who does public relations for Israel's Ministry of Tourism. "What kind of nonsense is that?" Hagay Nagar, the Israeli co-owner of Hoomoos Asli in New York, says that falafel is now "an international food, like a hamburger." (Nevertheless, his restaurant has an Arabic name: "Asli," a word adopted by Israeli slang, means "original" in Arabic.)
- Your edits are downplaying the contestation over the issue of falafel's ownership, rather than fully explaining it to the reader. I'm surprised by your lack of understanding and respect for WP:NPOV. Please self-revert and add what you feel needs to be added to achieve balance, instead of doing it by mangling the meaning of the text in place. Tiamuttalk 11:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Nobody "owns" felafel. The article states it originated in Egypt and is eaten throughout the Middle East and now, the world. What is your interest in perpetuating this stupid, political argument? Felafel is enjoyed by many people and considered an element of Arab cuisine. That can be stated quite simply, without bringing in the opinion of every street cleaner, dishwasher and felafel seller in NY, not to mention attention seeking researchers who need to spice up their thesis to get someone to read it. Here on Wikipedia, we have an opportunity to make the world a better place by offering information. Your material is political, and is phrased in a style that will only keep the debate over this page raging. What a waste of creative energy.--Gilabrand (talk) 11:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
How sad. This said though, I think the article should report the controversy so I would propose starting a sourced section on the controversy itself, as a sub-section of a thoroughly sourced history section. By sourced, I would tend to agree with what Gilabrand implies: Sourced PoV and opinion can be helpful but it must come from a published expert. I don't think owning a restaurant qualifies anyone as a food historian (although a food historian may own a restaurant), so sundry published quotes from retail vendors may not be reliable. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Since you people can't stop the warring...
I've created Talk:Falafel/Workshop. Propose edits THERE. Let's not have more of this nightmare on food pages. M1rth (talk) 13:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- I've restored the history section because I see no need to delete its sourced information during the discussion. Moreover, I think it's ok to add more sourced material of whatever PoV to the article without bringing it up first on the talk page, so long as the source meets WP:V. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
To clarify, I only restored the sourced history section as a starting point for discussion, thinking more sources would show up shortly and balance the section's PoV. Had I known a request to protect the page had been made, I would not have restored the section. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
{{editprotected}} Gwen and I are in agreement : the best way to resolve the dispute is to remove the section to the created workshop page where both sides will be equally forced to work out their differences rather than seeing a "default" version protected. We are requesting Gwen's last edit prior to page protection be reverted, as per Gwen's statement above and this diff. M1rth (talk) 17:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
History Section
This RfC created to hopefully get a few more editors to help out on Talk:Falafel/Workshop. I hope this is a good use of RfC, let's see if a few more eyes can't help the troubles. For users coming in new, see the talk page above and the page history for various different versions. M1rth (talk) 18:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- I think the history section should be reinstated. It's removal seems POV. Falafel has a long Arab history, and a short Israeli (and rest of the world) one. That said, I'm not a fan of the wording. Isn't enough to have a short line or two explaining that the falafel is now popular in Israel and some feel that it has been appropriated as an 'authentically' Israeli food - rather than the extended attack which was there. We don't need to turn this article into cultural war, even if we make brief mention of it. Falafel is too good a food for that - I'm a white New Zealander and I love it as much as anyone! Mostlyharmless (talk) 05:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- For your edification, the History section was removed to a workshop page so that neither side of the POV dispute had reason to feel that "their" version was protected. I had hoped this would encourage them to come together an work on a compromise version, with the entire goal of re-adding a proper version and not having more edit wars. Care to propose a version on the workshop page please? M1rth (talk) 07:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- It's odd that an article about food has been fully protected because of edit warring. I can't pretend to be an expert on whether falafel is an authentic Arab or Israeli dish, but it is served widely in both cultures and the wording of the article should reflect this, and not be used as a battleground for political issues. --♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Documenting the history of how a dish invented and consumed primarilyl by Arabs, came to be considered "Israeli"m and also eaten worldwide is relevant to the article. It is unfortunate that people are offended by historical facts, but that doesn't mean the information should not be included. It is also unfortunate that people have failed to discuss these issues calmly and that everything associated with the Middle East seems to morph into a political battle. But we cannot avoid reporting on things just because they are controversial. Wikipedia is not censored. Tiamuttalk 12:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Protected
Fully protected - due to the level of disruptive edit-warring over the last few weeks. As M1rth says, please use the talk page to resolve your issues instead. Let me know when things are sorted and I'll lift the article protect. Thanks - Alison ❤ 15:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Tiamut, since you asked, I have moved Talk:Falafel/Workshop to Falafel/Workshop so that Talk:Falafel/Workshop can be used to discuss edits in an easier fashion. Thank you for pointing this out and I hope it helps. M1rth (talk) 17:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
re: Falafel has been part of the diet of Arabs, as well as Mizrahi Jews for centuries.
Are you challenging this statement? If so, on what grounds? Or are you objecting to the source alone? If you object to the source, why? And why is that enough to remove this line? I don’t honestly know what kind of a reputation e-cookbooks has, but I do know that it is a third-party that publishes non-controversial and non-extremist material directly relevant to the topic, making it appropriate to the context. - Irn (talk) 17:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- So I realized that the Kantor article is actually from the NYTimes, which kind of renders this discussion a moot point; however, I still want to hear your responses, if you could take the time to do so. - Irn (talk) 17:35, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Hebrew name
Falafel is an Arabic word, so why do we have the Hebrew transliteration of the Arabic after the bolded term in the introduction? I should note that we are having the same discussion at Talk:Za'atar and that I've asked at the WP:MoS talk page for some guidance on how to deal with other languages in parentheses. My own personal opinion is that the transliteration in languages not related to the term's etymology are unnecessary and raise the question of where to draw the line (for example, should we also list how falafel is transcribed in Greek?) Your feedback, here, at Za'atar or the MoS page, would be appreciated. Tiamuttalk 01:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- I think we should follow the solution used on Za'atar and give the Hebrew name lower down in the article when it is mentioned in an Israeli context. I myself remember restoring the Hebrew name after it was removed, but that was only because a vandal had repeatedly tried to remove every reference to Israel. Lesgles (talk) 16:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed, though this is a closer call than za'atar. Jd2718 (talk) 18:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
- What makes it a closer call? -- Irn (talk) 03:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- While the word is Arabic, it really has been fully adopted by Israelis, to the point where I believe (do not know) that many no longer are aware of its origins. That does not seem to be the case with za'atar. While personal experience is worth nothing here, I'll note all the same that here in New York we can buy a variety of Arab or Israeli felafel, but I only know Arab places to buy za'atar (and I see Israelis in those places, too.) Jd2718 (talk) 04:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- What makes it a closer call? -- Irn (talk) 03:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Zaatar is sold at all stores in the U.S. that sell Israeli products and kosher food. It comes in a small, pyramid-shaped carton clearly marked as Za'atar in Hebrew and English.thumb|100px
- Agreed, though this is a closer call than za'atar. Jd2718 (talk) 18:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Israeli-Arabic Conflict everywhere
Arab-israeli Controversy? Even Palestinian?? On a Falafel article??? Have u all gone mad? First I was a little skeptic about wikipedia loosing it's value but now I know the disease spread to every hole possible. Dan Almagor WTF?? everybody laughed about the song in israel that it's not true, but ITS NOT THAT IMPORTANT TO BE NOTED ON FALAFEL. I was rubbing my eyes to read this shit about "leading many Palestinians and Arabs to resent the cultural appropriation of this iconic food." there are no words to describe the disproportional writing... this is the low u can get i'm serious. god help u.--Bob1969 (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Insufficient and poorly written article
This article is very poorly written, you either mention all its origin countries or nothing. The modern falafel most people recognize today is made with chickpeas as a base and this falafel originate from Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and has been eaten in those territories for as long as anyone can remember. This article should emphasize more on those countries. --Beyrouthhh (talk) 23:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Turkish restaurants all sell Falafell
I have to a few Turkish restaurants all they all sell fallafel. So I am not sure why it merely mentioned Arab regions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.246.86 (talk) 23:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Arabic case endings are not optional
They are commonly omitted, but this is wrong. If you watched Arabic news and formal media you would see that they are still fully realized. HD1986 (talk) 07:08, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
The word "falafel" is not Arabic per se (at least not formal Arabic). The formal Arabic word is "falāfilu." Arabic is not like Greek, there is no "Demotic" Arabic ... There is only one formal Arabic whose grammar is just exactly the same as the grammar of Classical Arabic, and there are countless modern "informal" dialects that are never written down nor used for anything formal or close to formal. HD1986 (talk) 10:13, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- I think it's ridiculous to include ʾiʿrab for falāfil; no variety of modern spoken Arabic pronounces the ʾiʿrab. As for your claim that Modern Standard Arabic (fuṣḥā) is "exactly the same as the grammar of Classical Arabic", though this is the traditional position, I don't think you'll find any serious linguists who agree. --macrakis (talk) 01:39, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
I didn't say modern formal Arabic is identical to Classical Arabic, I said the grammar of modern formal Arabic is identical to Classical Arabic's. I don't think there is anybody who would disagree with that. Give me one gramatical difference between modern and classical Arabic? Of course there are few unofficial differences (like in the rules of pause) but these are looked at in the Arab cultures as "common mistakes" not as differences; there is not a single source or institution teaching Arabic whose primary grammatical reference is not Classical Arabic. HD1986 (talk) 04:02, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Can I write the US motto as E PLURIB UN? No, I can't or that wouldn't be Latin but Spanish, Portuguese, French or whatever. Same thing, flafel is Syrian, Egyptian, Saudi. etc. but is not Arabic. HD1986 (talk) 04:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
- In English-language sources (including the most scholarly), the citation form of Arabic words is invariably given without inflectional endings (ʾiʿrab). The definitive Encyclopaedia of Islam (2nd ed.), ed. P. Bearman et al. writes GHidhā, samn, simsim, etc.. Even the Encyclopedia of the Qurʾan, which unquestionably covers the most classical of Arabic, refers to aqwāt etc. The Oxford English Dictionary's etymology of falafel gives the source as falāfil. You may be correct in some abstract sense, but Wikipedia follows the best available sources, and they unanimously indicate that Arabic words are cited without ʾiʿrab. --macrakis (talk) 12:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I have read enough material in Semitic linguistics to know that what you say is not true. Many sources do cite the Arabic words properly, but as I've told you already, this is just a common mistake that is not admissible by any authoroty concerned with the Arabic language. However, as far as I am confident that you are wrong, so what? I'm not going to waste any more time over this discussion. I don't understand what makes people so enthusiastic about editing WP. It is really boring and an absolute waste of time. Bye in Greek. HD1986 (talk) 17:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Since you have not found any sources supporting your position here or in the discussion on Talk:Bet (letter), I think we have to go with the best source we have, namely the Encyclopedia of Islam. --macrakis (talk) 22:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
If you are going to modify the transliteration, make sure that you don't leave it italic. HD86 (talk) 00:19, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
- ? Italics are the standard way of mentioning non-English words. --macrakis (talk) 20:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Not when you make them look like transliterations ... you just keep on making these false transliterations and eventually you'll see me suing you for systemic deception ... HD86 (talk) 21:22, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
- Ha ha.
- By the way: "If you make legal threats or take legal action over a Wikipedia dispute, you may be blocked from editing so that the matter is not exacerbated through other channels. Users who make legal threats will typically be blocked from editing indefinitely while legal threats are outstanding." Wikipedia:No legal threats --macrakis (talk) 04:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I wouldn't be suing Wikipedia, I would be suing you, Macrakis (Arabic: al-muqarqisu المقرقس). HD86 (talk) 16:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Threatening to sue me constitutes a legal threat under Wikipedia's Wikipedia:No legal threats policy, even if it is (as in this case) an absurd threat. If you want to change WP's policy on this, you can pursue it at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Arabic). --macrakis (talk) 13:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
I see you have become an expert in the Wiki law. You are certainly going to need that. HD86 (talk) 16:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
POV Dispute
Section is written solely using sources that appear in publications which are genenerally supportive of the Israeli State. Although this is English Wikipedia, and a by its very nature has a bias towards viewpoints from english speaking countries (US/UK etc), it fails to faithfully represent viewpoints of Arab and Muslim countries in regards to the Israeli adoption of Falafel. Perhaps someone should consult the Arabic or Farsi versions of Wikipedia to help balance out the information presented here; or at the VERY LEAST consult and INCLUDE some middle-eastern (non Israel) based sources for the Israel & Palestine sections. ---- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avayaricoh (talk • contribs) 22:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I agree, it is obvious that the English WP often adoptes Israeli POV's in its articles; most of the Arab users I'v talked to agree on that.
However, as for the food, although it is true that Arabs despised how Israelis stole Falafel and ascribed it to themselves, it is just only one dish. It is not like they stole the whole Middle Eastern cuisine. I actually have never seen anyone asking why every Middle Eastern dish turns out to be Lebanese? I mean, Lebanon is just so small and represents probably less than 2% of the total area in Middle East, and it is not a real nation, it is just a country that was invented yesterday ... yet somehow every Middle Eastern food turns out to be Lebanese and is known around the world as Lebanese. So why are you angry with the Israelis? It is just Falafel ... HD1986 (talk) 07:06, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
It was, initially, a response to Jayjg's cynical NPOV (*sarcasm*) "concerns". I even admited that my initial version could have been pushing a POV, and i watered it down a lot of my own volition. He wanted to white-wash it further down. Then accused me of manipulating the source. I'm no Joan Peters manipulating Ottoman records to publish my own From Time Immemorial. I did no manipulating of anything. I merely added context which was already made by the source itself. I never said everything in the falafel article was a direct quote. Besides, one needs not direct quote everything, paraphrasing is fine too. Even summarising the essence of the article for time's convenience. Still, Jayjg kept reverting.
At the end of the day, the section (however it came about) is relevant. Al-Andalus (talk) 17:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
- That's funny. LOL. I personally see the Lebanese claim to falafel, tabboule, hummus, etc. as just financially motivated.
- As for the Israeli "claim", I personally (and this is MY personal opinion, in contrast to what I've contributed on the article, which in actuality, doesn't conform with my own view) consider falafel to be 100% Israeli, no more and no less than it is the authentic cuisine of any other country, however long or short it may have been "popular" among the modern denizens. I often contribute things that contradict my own stance, if that's how things are.
- But back to falafel, and having said I consider it 100% Israeli too; was it invented there? No. We know that, but that wasn't the issue. It wasn't invented in Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan, Iraqi, Yemen, Syria, etc. either (where it is also considered a traditional food). That doesn't mean any of them have any less right to call it their traditional food, so likewise for Israel.
- What I contested as POV was the removal of the mention of how it existed in Israel/Palestine before the Mizrahim popularized it upon their immigration to Israel, from whatever country each originated from. Their arrival popularised the food which was already present since they were already familiar with it, not as Jews, but as people sharing a common Arab culture. That's all I wanted reflected, but unfortunately, that is something that offends the sensibilities of certain people who try to obliterate any reminder of the wonderful culture associated to unique communities of Jews from the Arab world who had their culture obliterated and despised, swept under the rug as if it were something to be ashamed of. Get over it, is my advice.
- Anyway, despite my objection to the views expressed by the groups or people mentioned in the new section, I do believe they are relevant, otherwise I wouldn't have created the section (especially considering that they do not align with my personal views on the matter). Al-Andalus (talk) 01:17, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
- Don't attribute material to sources that they haven't said. I've cleaned that up for you again, but it's an egregious violation of policy, and if you do it again, I'll simply revert. I hope that's clear. Jayjg (talk) 00:51, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- Ok Jayjg, then answer this. Why do you keep removing the "Still" from the quote "Still, it wasn't until..." What on earth do you think the "Still" refers to? It refers to the Palestinians history of falafel. The Palestinians are the context of the source article. If you don't agree, what context do you think it is in? Does "it wasn't until" refer to an implication that before the Mizrahim, falafel didn't exist in Israel/Palestine. Or, does "it wasn't until" refer to an implication that before the Mizrahim, falafel wasnt popular among Israelis, although having already been present and consumed by Palestinians? I know it irks you, but mate, be sincere for once. Don't shave down the quote. Leave it as "Still, it wasn't until...." and just put it in the context set out by the article itself. Al-Andalus (talk) 06:21, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- 1. Do not speculate about why people say things. According to the source, the "Still" refers to the fact that "These Zionists, by and large socialists, loved humble street foods like falafel."
- 2. This edit introduced irrelevant material from unreliable sources that was also a word for word copy of the source. Don't do that again.
- 3. Comment on content, not on the contributor.
- I hope that's clear. Jayjg (talk) 01:47, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- Ok Jayjg, then answer this. Why do you keep removing the "Still" from the quote "Still, it wasn't until..." What on earth do you think the "Still" refers to? It refers to the Palestinians history of falafel. The Palestinians are the context of the source article. If you don't agree, what context do you think it is in? Does "it wasn't until" refer to an implication that before the Mizrahim, falafel didn't exist in Israel/Palestine. Or, does "it wasn't until" refer to an implication that before the Mizrahim, falafel wasnt popular among Israelis, although having already been present and consumed by Palestinians? I know it irks you, but mate, be sincere for once. Don't shave down the quote. Leave it as "Still, it wasn't until...." and just put it in the context set out by the article itself. Al-Andalus (talk) 06:21, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- Don't attribute material to sources that they haven't said. I've cleaned that up for you again, but it's an egregious violation of policy, and if you do it again, I'll simply revert. I hope that's clear. Jayjg (talk) 00:51, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- Anyway, despite my objection to the views expressed by the groups or people mentioned in the new section, I do believe they are relevant, otherwise I wouldn't have created the section (especially considering that they do not align with my personal views on the matter). Al-Andalus (talk) 01:17, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
It would appear that 1/3 of the article about Falafel is now actually about "The 'Israeli falafel' controversy", and sourced mostly to two newspaper articles. This is an obvious violation of WP:UNDUE. Unless I hear some compelling arguments to the contrary, I'll be cutting that section down to a size that complies with WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 00:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- I object and qould suggest that you instead work on expanding the article, which requires a lot more information on the history of Falafel. Taking out material that discusses that history simply because it presently focuses on the food's more recent history in the Israeli context is most certainly not a solution. Tiamuttalk 15:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
- I don't see any undue weight. Looks like the section is less than 1/4, not 1/3. Quite reasonable. The first three paragraphs are direct, brief, and well-sourced. Perhaps the last one (about Lebanese claims, traveling a tangent to feta) could be pruned or removed. Jd2718 (talk) 02:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- 1/4 of the entire article about falafel, a ubiquitous Middle Eastern food, is about an obscure claim that Israel "appropriated" it from its "real" owners? Aside from the absurdity of the dispute, it's an obvious violation of WP:UNDUE. This dispute could and should be described in two sentences. Unless I hear some compelling arguments to the contrary, I'll be cutting that section down to a size that complies with WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 02:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- Please do not edit against consensus. And please choose language more carefully. There is no need, especially on an I/P page, to intentionally select words that tend to inflame. You know better. Jd2718 (talk) 04:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm going to have to agree with Jayjg, that it violates WP:UNDUE and possibly WP:POV. There are quite a few direct quotes in the section -- some of them several sentences long. Perhaps it would be best to state the facts using encyclopedic language, instead of so many quotes, which tends to make the section read in such a way that it seems the article is taking a particular stance or giving undue weight to the issue. --Nsaum75 (talk) 15:15, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm going to remove the last paragraph of the section. I can't find supporting evidence for the notability of the organization (The Lebanese Industrial Association was threatening the suit) nor for its spokesman. The have also claimed that they would sue over felafel. I have found no evidence that these suits were actually filed. This was a non-notable news story about an event (a threat of a suit) that has not, going forward, attracted much attention. There remain six sentences in the section, broken into three paragraphs (presumably for readability). They cover the question briefly, directly, and with good sources. Jd2718 (talk) 23:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- It's not just that the section violates WP:UNDUE, it also fundamentally violated NPOV in other ways. For example, the source article includes quotes from people both supporting and refuting the "Israel stole falafel" view, yet only quotations from the former had been included in the article. I've fixed that now, but, of course, that only make the section longer. Jayjg (talk) 01:22, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- You've included a response to a response, which I will remove. You've also included a source that makes a direct claim of falafel being Israeli. That might properly belong. Jd2718 (talk) 03:30, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- "Response to a response"? What's that? Please point out the section in policy where I can read more about that. Jayjg (talk) 03:44, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- Nathan's quote puts forward an argument. Weill simply attacks (and in a particularly snarky and content-free way). The former balances, the latter makes WP sound like talk radio. It is, simply, the most extreme single line in a 20 paragraph newspaper article; it was selected poorly. Jd2718 (talk) 14:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- "Response to a response"? What's that? Please point out the section in policy where I can read more about that. Jayjg (talk) 03:44, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- You've included a response to a response, which I will remove. You've also included a source that makes a direct claim of falafel being Israeli. That might properly belong. Jd2718 (talk) 03:30, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- It's not just that the section violates WP:UNDUE, it also fundamentally violated NPOV in other ways. For example, the source article includes quotes from people both supporting and refuting the "Israel stole falafel" view, yet only quotations from the former had been included in the article. I've fixed that now, but, of course, that only make the section longer. Jayjg (talk) 01:22, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- I'm going to remove the last paragraph of the section. I can't find supporting evidence for the notability of the organization (The Lebanese Industrial Association was threatening the suit) nor for its spokesman. The have also claimed that they would sue over felafel. I have found no evidence that these suits were actually filed. This was a non-notable news story about an event (a threat of a suit) that has not, going forward, attracted much attention. There remain six sentences in the section, broken into three paragraphs (presumably for readability). They cover the question briefly, directly, and with good sources. Jd2718 (talk) 23:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'm going to have to agree with Jayjg, that it violates WP:UNDUE and possibly WP:POV. There are quite a few direct quotes in the section -- some of them several sentences long. Perhaps it would be best to state the facts using encyclopedic language, instead of so many quotes, which tends to make the section read in such a way that it seems the article is taking a particular stance or giving undue weight to the issue. --Nsaum75 (talk) 15:15, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- Please do not edit against consensus. And please choose language more carefully. There is no need, especially on an I/P page, to intentionally select words that tend to inflame. You know better. Jd2718 (talk) 04:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- 1/4 of the entire article about falafel, a ubiquitous Middle Eastern food, is about an obscure claim that Israel "appropriated" it from its "real" owners? Aside from the absurdity of the dispute, it's an obvious violation of WP:UNDUE. This dispute could and should be described in two sentences. Unless I hear some compelling arguments to the contrary, I'll be cutting that section down to a size that complies with WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 02:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- I don't see any undue weight. Looks like the section is less than 1/4, not 1/3. Quite reasonable. The first three paragraphs are direct, brief, and well-sourced. Perhaps the last one (about Lebanese claims, traveling a tangent to feta) could be pruned or removed. Jd2718 (talk) 02:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- Some people could argue, that due to the nature and wording of all the quotes here, it makes the section read like talk radio. I've noticed that on WP, in general, many editors often resort to the inclusion of long or extensive quotes, to bias an article one way or another, in order to avoid violating WP:NPOV. That way, when what they have written is challenged, they can counter with the argument "Its sourced". Usually then the challenge is dropped.
- On the contrary, Jd2718, Weill puts forth the argument that it's quite silly to claim Israel "stole" falafel from the Palestinians, just as it's silly to claim they stole pasta from the Italians. The Palestinians didn't invent falafel; that was probably Egyptian Copts, and in any event, it's now a food prepared, eaten, and modified by many different countries in the region. Removing cogent counter-arguments is a violation of WP:NPOV, please don't do it again. Jayjg (talk) 22:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Come on Jayjg ... Israelis have just arrived there yesterday, do you really believe they participated in the invention of falfel? You're making me start to believe that the "Lebanese" dishes may actually be Lebanese, lol ... HD86 (talk) 05:47, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- Jews have been in the middle east as long as Arabs have. Not all Jews are Israelis and not all Israelis are Jews. That said, Israel is officially a "Jewish state" (much like Syria is an Arab state) and at times in ancient history, versions of a "Jewish state" have existed.
- In addition, people claiming a food belongs to certain Arab nation must keep in mind that the Arab nations have only existed in their present form about as long as Israel. Previously they were part of the British Mandate and before that the Ottoman Empire - thus the food cannot be attributed to them either. AND -- Who is to say Jews of antiquity didn't have any hand in the development of foods and cuisines in the middle east? In fact, until the creation of Israel, the Jewish population of the middle east was spread out across all areas of that region -- not just the land of Palestine (and in fact, Jews still exist in smaller numbers in the Arab states). It may be unpopular to say, but I'd bet money that the jews of history had a part in creation of "middle eastern" or traditionally "Arab" foods, by virtue of them living side by side with Arabs for centuries.
- Would someone please tell me, if there exists OBJECTIVE documentation, what is wrong with mentioning a food's form and popularity within the boundaries of a current political entity? --Nsaum75 (talk) 07:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- There isn't. The section "Israeli Falafel Controversy" should be renamed "Falafel in Israel" (I'll do that) and should open with a statement of how popular falafel is in Israel today (I'll put in a bland placeholder statement... someone could find something sourced to replace it) Jd2718 (talk) 14:01, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Actually I believe that Jews gave many great things to Arabs, including Islam, their most precious gem, which is basically an Arabized form of Judaism. The Jews were great people and I like them.
However, the Israelis didn't give a **** to anybody ... HD86 (talk) 15:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- Re: your comment However, the Israelis didn't give a **** to anybody -- really, here are a few of the more recent things the Israelis are responsible for : [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] & perhaps best of all: [12] -- But, hey! - don't let us burden you with the facts. Tundrabuggy (talk) 05:19, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Please Get a Wikipedia Arabic admin to fix the misinformation
the article is very biased , and it is understandable after the latest tensions that the food have sparked between Israel and the arab world. I have no issue with Israelis or Jews , if the control the media or the US or whatever other entity or country then BRAVO for them .... this is not the issue. The issue is that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia , so informations are supposed to be correct, Wikipedia is not a promoting medium ,unfortunetly in this article , it is promoting the idea that Falafel is an isreali or jewish achievement and not a very well known arab and turkish dish , the reason behind such promoting campaign is that the israeli or jewish food shops in the US probably want to make people think that they can only get Falafel in a Jewish fast food store , which is not the case . the Israeli media have even started throwing theories that Falafel is not arabic and other claims like such . the bottom line you need to get an arabic wikipedia admin to resolve the ambiguity after all falafel is an arabic dish !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadday8 (talk • contribs) 2008-12-03T21:38:52 (UTC)
- Ok, stop. There is no belief in the US that Falafel is an Israeli or Jewish dish. Anyone who knows what it is should know that it's an arabic dish. What you're doing with your edit warring is not reclaiming the article from jewish extremists - there's no such claim made anywhere that I can see. You're using the article to launch an attack on them by creating a pretext that they claim that.
- This is a false argument. No such claim is made. Saying that the claim is not true, when it in fact is not made, is racist.
- Please stop edit warring.
- (Back to eating my Falafel and Schwerma Wrap lunch, purchased at a (I believe) Jordanian-owned restaraunt in the US...) Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
there not intension on attacking anyone , and i'm sorry if it was unintentionally done , but as i have mentioned above the dish have sparked international tension , if nobody was claiming the dish was what it was not , such tensions wouldn't have existed in such a subject. the irony of the situation is that i was trying to search what possible ingredients i can add to the falafel that i was making, inorder to modify the taste a bit, when i saw this article :)
Removal of Israel section
There has been no adequate justification for any inclusion of the Israeli section at all - it's argued above that it clearly violates WP:UNDUE, and the inclusion appears to be a clear violation of WP:BATTLE, by trying to drag Wikipedia into an external dispute.
This is not an appropriate use of Wikipedia pages.
I am going to remove the section. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
- The Hummus article is already protected in the hope that editors reach a sensible compromise. I've suggested at WT:IPCOLL that people consider the same action here.--Peter cohen (talk) 21:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Favism
Sadday8, the link you keep removing is a source for the statement about favism. The article in question is, contrary to your edit summary, very relevant, as it clearly says "favism, an inherited enzymatic deficiency occurring among some Jews--mainly those of Kurdish and Iraqi ancestry, many of whom came to Israel during the mid 1900s--proved potentially lethal, so all falafel makers in Israel ultimately stopped using fava beans, and chickpea falafel became an Israeli dish.". This is not a spam link, but a reprint of content from a book (The Foods of Israel Today, Joan Nathan, Knopf 2001), by the author if the same book (Nathan). Please don't remove this again. NoCal100 (talk) 16:06, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
- The sentence implies that favaism is the reason chickpea and not fava bean falafel is eaten in Israel today. The implied claim is ridiculous, the source is a recipe web site claiming to be citing a book, which itself is not a genetics or medical book. Palestinians eat chickpea falafel... Jewish immigrants would have encountered no other kind. That would be the first reason we find chickpea falafel in Israel. Jd2718 (talk) 22:21, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
To balance the bias
Falafel is a very well-known Arab recipe, though in recent years, Israeli natinalists and racists seem to have hijacked it, claiming it's Israeli/Jewish, whish is absolutely horrendous owing to no proof, except the widely-propogated bull they are circuilating. I'm currently busy with studies, but when I'm finished I'll try find as much peer-reviewed reliable sources as possible and put an end to this rubbish. In the meantime, to make this article somehwt less ridiculous, I will add the (correct) opposing POV that some believe it's Arab. My source is: http://www.cliffordawright.com/caw/recipes/display/recipe_id/739/
Sorry this is done on the fly, but I highly doubt that's any less reliable - if not actually so much more so, than an Israeli News Agency, who will obviously take on a racist anti-Arab agenda. Pink Princess (talk) 23:58, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Israeli sections
The Israeli sections of the article must be removed including the hebrew letters from the beginning and the image from Nazareth "Israel" Falafel is 100% Arab, it comes from Arab countries. Israel and Jews have nothing to do with it. How is it possible that so much info about Israel and Jews are fit into this article when they have zero claim or history to it? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 16:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- I've removed the Hebrew. The word is of Arabic origin and therefore that is the only non-English rendition needed. In ther context of the adoption of Middle Eastern food by Zionist settlers, it might be worth mentioning the Lebanese attempt to get the EU to restrict various foodstuffs of Arab origin - I think Falafel was one of those involved. As for the illustration, nost of the people in the picture do not look at all like Ashkhenazi Jews. The caption also implies it is a Palestinian restaurant.--Peter cohen (talk) 19:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Of all the citys in the Arab world, why pick Nazarteh which the international community sees as Israel? And also its just a picture from a restaurant, you cant see any falafel in it. Why isnt it enough with the one from Ramallah? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
- This is a re-post of my comment from the Za'atar discussion page, in regards to the similar request Supreme Deliciousness (talk) made there to have all Israeli and Jewish references removed from the Za'atar article. I believe the comment is relevant here as well.
- The information regarding Israel is from reliable sources and publications. Its inclusion may be challenged, however one of Wikipedia's core tenets[13] is to ensure all articles are written from a neutral point of view, and removal of properly sourced Israeli/Jewish-related information might be viewed as a violation of that tenet. --Nsaum75 (talk) 01:06, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
The picture from Nazarteh shows no falafel in the picture, therfore it is useless and should be removed. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- Your original reasoning for wanting the photo removed was that it was a photo taken in "Nazareth, Israel" and that falafel is "100% Arab". It is further stated that "Of all the citys in the Arab world, why pick Nazarteh which the international community sees as Israel?". The author of the photo states, in the photo description, that its a "falafel restaurant". This would seem to make the photo as relevant to the article as a photo of an ice cream parlor is to the article about ice cream or a photo of a Shawarma restaurant/vendor is to the Shawarma article. Regardless, based on your previous comments (listed above), it seems that your main opposition to the photo isn't really about what the photo shows, but rather that the photo was taken in a Israeli city. --Nsaum75 (talk) 20:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
My opposition to the photo is as I sayed before, why have a picture from a city Israel controls? This is an Arab dish. There are tens of thousands of Arab citys and restaurants, why Nazareth of all of these? Israel has nothing to do with this food. Second, you can not compare the picture to if it was an ice cream parlor becasue if you look at the picture, there is nothing showing it is a falafel restaurant, there are baguetts to the left and it looks like shawerama/kebab, vegetables,7ummos and sauces, but there is no falafel. If it was an ice cream store picture, you would have seen ice creem cones, ice cream, maybe something colorful on the walls etc. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
- It is clear that falafel has become a national dish in Israel. The article clearly indicates that this is a cultural borrowing (or appropriation), but nonetheless it is a national dish in Israel today. That being said, the photo shows neither falafel nor a sign advertising it; I am removing it. Feel free to substitute a more appropriate photo. Jd2718 (talk) 23:31, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- Concur. Supreme Deliciousness - you have displayed an obvious anti-Israeli bias above, and you need to pay more attention to Wikipedia policies such as don't use Wikipedia as a battlefield and articles need to use a neutral point of view.
- However, the particular point that there are no visual signs of falafel in the particular picture are valid. It may well be a falafel restaraunt, serving them as well as the other food which is in view, but I agree that no falafel in view makes the image somewhat off topic for this article. Jd2718's removal seems reasonable to me. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
- In an attempt to provide balance, I have added a photo of a falafel restaurant, located in an arab neighborhood, in Haifa. Falafel is clearly visible on the signage, and the signage uses both hebrew and arabic characters --Nsaum75 (talk) 00:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
British English pronunciation
The pronunciation says this is pronounced like "fa-LAH-fel", but I think this is only true in American English. In British English, I have only ever heard people say it as "fa-LAF-el". That said, I have not heard it very often. Could someone who hears it quite a lot (e.g. someone who works in the British falafel industry, if there is such a thing) confirm or deny that this is the case? leevclarke (talk) 16:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Etymology is Coptic
I'm a little surprised at the etymology given for "falafel" from the Arabic "felfel" - pepper does not even feature prominently in the recipe. The etymology is in fact Coptic "Fa-La-Fel" means literally "Of Lots of Beans" (Fa="of", La="lots, many", Fel="beans"). This etymology is a direct hit - no contrived explanations about how it the word may refer to a minor ingredient in the recipe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.95.211.200 (talk) 00:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Images
There is a new battle over alleged pro-Israel bias with two of the images, the restaurant in Haifa, and the deep fried slices. Personally, I can't see much wrong with the restaurant photo, because it shows that the dish is popular among Arabs and Jews, with the sign over the door being in Arabic and Hebrew. However, I do wonder whether the fried slices need to be described as coming from Tel Aviv. Is this necessary, or could this be omitted?--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Picture of the restaurant is meaningless, this article is about falafel, not restaurants. And to have two pictures from Israel is excessive about an Arab dish and not neutral. You are right about that the picture of the fried slices does not have to say where the picture is taken. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- The restaurant picture seems to have been added in good faith, and is free from Commons. Fish and chips has way too many photos (just look at it), but it is logical to have at least one photo of a fish and chip shop. Rather than set off more edit warring on this, I've removed the Tel Aviv part from the deep fried caption, since this does seem to be non-essential.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:41, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- I included the country because I am unaware if they are served in fried sliced form in Arab countries as well, or if this style of falafel is unique to Israel.
- I also searched the wikipedia commons for a photo of an falafel shop from an Arab country, since there seemed to be an issue with having a photo of one in Israel, however I was unable to find one. --Nsaum75 (talk) 07:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- Picture from Ramallah is a falafel shop.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:51, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- I also searched the wikipedia commons for a photo of an falafel shop from an Arab country, since there seemed to be an issue with having a photo of one in Israel, however I was unable to find one. --Nsaum75 (talk) 07:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- The deep fried slices aren't mentioned in the article text. Probably should be, but a source that indicates how widely this style is used would also be useful.--14:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- You could as easily say that using a picture of a restaurant in an Arab neighbourhood is emphasising that it is a dish still associated with Arab culture evenin Israel.--Peter cohen (talk) 14:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- As ever, Wikipedia articles can be influenced by images that are available on Commons. I don't think that this was a deliberate attempt at bias, and the Haifa image shows that the dish has cross-cultural popularity.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
there be no proof that the jewish slice food be felafel so i remove it. until there be reliable source added that the jews serve a slice type of felafel, then foto cannot be in article. without reliable source how we know it really felafel and not other type chip? nsaum75 repeatedly try to disrupt many arab food article with falsehoods and pro-jewish state bias. he need to be repremanded or block from editing arab articles. it is him who cause these edit war, not anyone else! all be fine until he try to revise history to degrade arab contribution to world cuisine. thank you Ani medjool (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC).
- Regardless of the perennial Arab/Israeli dispute, the photo of the sliced and fried falafel needs to be mentioned and explained in the article. At the moment it is out on a limb, and unless it can be tied in with something that the article says, it could be removed as non-essential.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 08:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- Its a *VARIATION* of falafel I found served in Israel. I tried including that it was served in Israel in the caption (to explain why I was including the photo), but other editors were opposed to it saying "Tel Aviv, Israel" because it mentions a country some people are opposed to. WP:AGF - its falafel, its not a potato chip or corn chip. We don't question that the oblong things in the Ramallah photo are a) falafel or b) that its inside a falafel shop. We don't require sourced content to prove that fish and chips photos are fish and chips, even if it may not appear like the fish and chips served at our local pub. Furthermore, whats increasingly worrisome is that an editor keeps making broad statements about "the jews serve..." and "jewish sliced food", when it has nothing to do with Jews -- it has to do with Israel -- a country made up of not just Jews, but Muslims, Christians, Druze etc. I also feel that being accused of trying spreading "falsehoods", "revise history" and "degrade Arab contributions" is a personal attack -- when all I did was add a photo of some sliced fried falafel I bought in Tel-Aviv. This is getting ridiculous. --Nsaum75 (talk) 09:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
- It was actually invented in Italy, by a chef named Luigi Alfonzo Garbanzo, professionally known as L. Garbanzo. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 18:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
felafel is arab food not invent by italians or the jews. show me source that say italian invent it. nsaum75 i suggest you cease cry and cease play of traditional "poor me. poor jew" wolf call. nobody listen because they know the jew steal everything from us and rewrite history to degrade arab. i suggest you cease this vandalize of arab food by shoving you pro jew ajenda, which be antiarab by natural and deny culture of arab peoples. Ani medjool (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC).
Infobox available
Just letting the editors of this article know that there is Template:Infobox Prepared Food available for use in the article. Dual images can be stacked in the infobox and an example is the Paella article. Shinerunner (talk) 10:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)