Talk:Gazelle ankles
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Wholesale revert?
[edit]@M.Bitton It would be best to specify the exact problem with the text and/or fix the exact putative issue, rather than revert the whole edit, considering it was supported with several sources.-- Ideophagous (talk) 13:34, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- The problem is that you're using blogs (written by nobodies) for history claims. M.Bitton (talk) 13:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- You could remove the weak sources (not all of them were) and add a source request at the appropriate locations. That's better for collaboration in my opinion. Anyways, I'll review the sources and make appropriate adjustments.-- Ideophagous (talk) 13:48, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- They are unreliable sources for the claim that they are making (describing them as weak is giving the credit that they will never have). M.Bitton (talk) 13:53, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- You could remove the weak sources (not all of them were) and add a source request at the appropriate locations. That's better for collaboration in my opinion. Anyways, I'll review the sources and make appropriate adjustments.-- Ideophagous (talk) 13:48, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
Sources
[edit]@M.Bitton, the Peaceful Dumpling article is used to as a source for this information:
- Gazelle ankles (transliterated from Arabic: كعب الغزال kaʕbu lɣazaːl, also known in French as cornes de gazelle, "gazelle horns") are a traditional cookie of North Africa.
In the article, the writer states:
- "As I try finding where it was first created, it says on the internet that corne de gazelle is from Morocco but is popular in Algeria as well as in Tunisia."
Is this really what we're going to use as a source on an encyclopedia? A pastry apprentice and freelance writer stating what it "says on the Internet" ? Mooonswimmer 13:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Mooonswimmer: that can be removed, but what about the second source that you removed? What makes it less reliable than the others? M.Bitton (talk) 13:36, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- In my opinion, none of the sources cited are really reliable or suitable here.
- I am trying to access page 172 of Alain Jaouhari's Marruecos: la cocina de mi madre. Can you point out what information on the pastry is on the page, if you have access?
- The AllRecipes article is a recipe by "babou72", no information on the writer or their sources. Although AllRecipes does seem to have a decent editorial policy.
- What exactly does the France Revisted article verify? The fact that "cornes de gazelle" = "gazelle horns"? Mooonswimmer 13:51, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- I noticed that you responded after I self-reverted (see what I said below about the reliability). The used sources are making basic statements about something that is found all over the place; so as long as no academic claim is made by any of them, then they should technically all do. Had it not been for the fact that some nationalists kept fiddling with the article, it wouldn't have needed four of them. Let's hope that the kept two are enough. M.Bitton (talk) 14:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- We should still strive for high-quality, pertinent sources, even for the most basic of claims, and we shouldn't keep low-quality sources up for the sake of having these basic claims sources. The France Revisited article for example does not belong as a citation, in my opinion. It doesn't really verify anything.
- The pastry is inarguably North African (although I'd rather have it described as "Maghrebi"). Any attempts by nationalists to modify the article are likely driven by Moroccans or Algerians seeking to lay claim to its birthplace, a claim that would require multiple high-quality sources. If such problematic editing persists, the page can be protected. Mooonswimmer 14:25, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- I noticed that you responded after I self-reverted (see what I said below about the reliability). The used sources are making basic statements about something that is found all over the place; so as long as no academic claim is made by any of them, then they should technically all do. Had it not been for the fact that some nationalists kept fiddling with the article, it wouldn't have needed four of them. Let's hope that the kept two are enough. M.Bitton (talk) 14:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- Never mind. I self-reverted (two sources should be enough. Their quality is not that irrelevant given their basic claims). M.Bitton (talk) 13:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Tcharak
[edit]Tcharak is a turkish word, gazelle horn and Tcharak are too different dessert, Algeria and Morocco are too different countries,the food and dessert is different tcharak is a dessert that was brought to Algeria by the Othmans and it is not corn de gazelle corn de gazelle is a Moroccan dessert created by Moroccan in Fez someone in here is trying to twist thing. It not a "North african" dessert we cannot find it in Egypt and in libya tunisia and Algeria. Moroccan culture and cuisine is been portrayed as Algeria or north African where, it's not the case someone better check their history or just their kitchen after all Algerian cuisine is very basic and of recent year since 1963 so we can find multiple resources as their food is not as ancient as Morocco. Someone here is playing dirty 41.142.169.1 (talk) 23:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
gazelle horn and Tcharak are too different dessert
feel free to provide a reliable source that supports this and the other baseless claims of yours. M.Bitton (talk) 01:45, 10 March 2024 (UTC)