Talk:Paella/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Cleanup

This page is a mess, it needs reformatting. For this reason, I have nominated it for cleanup. skorpion 12:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. It's a mess. It was much better before the chorizos and the Asian paellas began to be introduced in the page.--Ploro 16:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup: Progress

Please note all cleanup changes here and why you changed it - and don't forget to sign it

Paella Variations

Changed the heading "Other Paellas" to "Paella Variations" as this more suits the contecnt of the section. skorpion 01:06, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Related paella traditions

Added a citation needed tag. skorpion 05:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

External Links

I have organised the external links at the bottom, removing that unsightly info box that had links to pictures from the university of valencia and putting the links on one line, to make it more organised. However I vote for the removal of those links entirely, we already have paella pictures and I believe these ones add little to the article. Please comment below this and vote. (remeber to tab in with a colon and sign your name) skorpion 23:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Changed the captions on some of the links to wikify them. skorpion 23:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Removed the advertisment for a spanish catering company. It was 1. in spanish and 2. spam. skorpion 22:32, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Editing this page

When editing the talk page please either start with a new heading if it is on a new topic or add to the bottom of a current topic. When starting a new topic pleasse add it to the bottom of the page, not the top as it interferes with the contents. Lastly please sign your comment with four tildes. All untitled talk that was on the page has been moved to the bottom. skorpion 12:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The external link

The external link on "mediterrasian.com" seems more an advert than really a good reference on how to cook a paella, or about paella, even with the most open-minded variations of the dish. I would remove it. A good source is "paella.net", although it is in Spanish. Unsigned.

I vote for removing the link! Unsigned.

mediterrasian.com is an excellent resource. I disagree with the removal of the link. Although their recipes at times may be a little bastardised, it still provides a good link with a paella recipe. Also please sign comments on talk pages. (this talk page has been reorganised to make more sense) skorpion 03:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I also vote for removing the link. It is not only bastardised, but it must be uneatable. There are so so many thing added to the paella, that I can't even see the rice. --Ploro 16:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I think I am out-voted! (link removed if it already hasnt been) skorpion 23:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

"Chorizo" and onions in a paella?

Please! I've seen peas in seafood paellas, but I've NEVER seen "chorizo" (not a typical valencian food) or onions in a paella. Please remove it from the definition; it's wrong.

P.S.: paella = Valencian paella. Unsigned.

Please sign comments on talk pages by using 4 tildes.skorpion 03:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the majority of the fake Spanish restaurants in the US, have paella with chorizo. It is a disgusting practice and a very clear tell-tale that the establishment is anything but Spanish.

==

Spelling

Fixed the spelling mistake in the 2nd paragraph, changed this:

In Valencia area, nevertheless, the name paella is commonly user for both, the pan and the dish.

to this:

In Valencia area, nevertheless, the name paella is commonly used for both, the pan and the dish.

skorpion 14:36, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I've fixed the missing 'r' in 'saffron'.

Guillem

Toasting the bottom

I read somewhere that during the final stage of cooking the heat was turned up and the rice in the bpottom of the ban was toasted. Can someone verify this? skorpion 14:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The other way round. If you turn up the heat at the end, the rice will be burned. Low fire can make the rice toast a little bit to a point which is usually referred to as "caramelització" (like sugar is turned into candy).--Ploro 16:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Valencians distinguish three sorts of overtoasted rice at the bottom of the pan, namely arròs daurat (browned rice), arròs socarradet (slightly burnt rice)and arròs socarrat (burnt rice). While the first two are delicate, the last one is discarded.

Guillem

Moved Talk

All of the below talk was moved from the top of the page where it was interferring with the contents. In future please 1. Title your talk if it is on a new topic. 2. add new talk to the bottom not the top. skorpion 06:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

What's meant by "non-rigorous" paella? Wouldn't "Rigorous Paella" be a great name for a rock band?

Stlemur

Please define sofrito. - Montréalais

The equivalence for 'sofreir' (verb 'to produce sofrito') provided by a dictionary is 'to fry lightly', which does not seem not much accurate. To make 'sofregit' (Catalan) or 'sofrito' (Spanish) is to fry-and-stir something (tipically onions, tomatoes, peppers, little bits of something, etc) in the frying pan over slow heat until it sort of melts or makes up a sauce.

I reverted to the the previous version with the image. Why was it removed? --Vikingstad 20:38, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Apart from the fact it does not match with any genuine variation of paella, the recipient is not flat, as it should be, the rice is not dry and it looks overdone. But the main reason is that the picture does not match with the recipe. The recipe given on the left is for a "paella de carn" (meat paella) and the picture is an "open-minded" "paella de marisc" (seafood paella) (with peas). It was removed because of coherence. -- Ploro, a Valencian

I agree. The photo is not very high quality and neither is the paella pictured. However, I think in general we should keep pictures until a better one comes along. I would highly encourage you to make a paella and take a picture and submit it to Wikipedia. If you're not sure how, see Wikipedia:Images. —Nohat 18:09, 2004 Feb 24 (UTC)

I would like to see some evidence that "true" paella doesn't include onion, garlic, chorizo, or peas. I couldn't verify that anywhere on the web. It sounds like someone's opinion to me. I'm qualifying the statement to make it more NPOV. --Nohat 02:27, 2004 Feb 20 (UTC)

Of course, there are opinions on this and probably you can put frogs into a paella and that might taste good. But paella is not like pizza. Paella was originated in the lowlands of Valencia, and it's been done in the same way for centuries, at least from the times tomato was introduced in Valencia around the seventeenth century. There are no chorizos in a lowland. Dried sausages are typical of cold places, so it's difficult to understand how chorizo could become a typical ingredient in a lowland, full of marshes.

Of course, you can see peas and chorizo in some touristic places (not in Valencia, but maybe in Madrid or Barcelona), although if someone has visited Spain once in their life can corroborate that these ingredients are not usual.

Needless to say that you won't see these ingredients in a home-made paella, at least 200 kms around Valencia.

If a Danish or Russian or Mexican makes something similar to a paella and tastes good, congratulations, but that's not a paella, at least a Valencian paella, or a Spanish paella. -- Jose, a Valencian

Perhaps not, but this article is called "paella", not "Valencian paella" or "Spanish paella". —Nohat

I decided to look up "Paella" in the Larousse Gastronomique, widely considered one of the most authoritative culinary encyclopedias.

PAELLA A traditional Spanish rice dish garnished with vegetables, chicken and shellfish. Its name is derived from that of the container in which it is prepared (paellera).

Paella originated in the region of Valencia. Its three basic ingredients are rice, saffron and olive oil. The garnish, which is cooked with the rice in stock, originally consisted either of chicken, snails, French beans (green beans), and peas or of eel, frogs and vegetables, but it became considerably enriched and varied as it spread throughout Spain and even beyond (see jambalaya). The garnish may now include chicken, rabbit, duck, lobster, mussels, langoustines, prawns (shrimp), squid, chorizo, French beans, peas, red (bell) peppers and artichoke hearts; chicken, chorizo, mussels, langoustines and peas are essential ingredients. Paella may be a rustic dish, cooked in the open air and eaten straight from the paellera, traditionally accompanied by small onions (not bread), or a very elaborate preparation, presented with great care, the different-coloured ingredients contrasting with the saffron-flavoured rice and set off by the green peas.

(italic emphasis original, bold emphasis added)

A recipe follows that includes onions and garlic. —Nohat

Very authoritative, ok, but it's wrong. I've never seen frogs in a paella. Never tasted a paella with chorizo. Usually, we don't mix meat with seafood. Either it is a Valencian paella ("paella de carn") with chicken, rabbit and maybe pork, or it is a "paella de pescado/marisco". Mixed paellas are not good combinations. Garlic is only added to the "paella de pescado", which might be more touristic because tourists expect to taste seafood dishes when they are on the beach. There is also "arròs negre" and "fideuà", which are variations, but they're very well established variations, and they have a fixed set of ingredients. You can check, e.g. http://www.lapaella.net/. I'm sorry not to be able to refer to the Real Academia Española for this or to other international recipe source. Of course if you look in google you will even find recipes with alien's meat into a paella, but I can give these two sources.

The most popular newspaper in the Valencia Region has a recipe site:

http://www.lasprovincias.es/valencia/ocio/recetas/

You can check this one:

http://www.lasprovincias.es/valencia/ocio/recetas/paellavalenciana.html

The most authoritative text on Valencian cuisine is J. Martí Dominguez "Els Nostres Menjars". I have it at home and it matches the recipe as it was, not like it has been changed afterwards.You can take a look at part of this book here: http://www.uv.es/~baldovi/cuina/index.html

Recipes are not laws, but cultural heritage. Hence, you won't see prohibitions or banned ingredients,but 'authoritative sources' must check the origins, history and customs of each recipe. It seems to me that the Larousse Gastronomique did a bad work on this. -- Jose, a Valencian

OK, I looked on lapaella.net, and it clearly says under Paella valenciana,

En temporada también admite alcachofa y guisantes.

Guisantes = peas, right?

It also says

Y aquí es donde empiezan las polémicas, porque los valencianos, por naturaleza, no nos ponemos de acuerdo en casi nada y con la paella no iba a ser de otra manera.

So you'll forgive me if I have trouble accepting an authoritative declaration of paella from just one or two Valencians. —Nohat

So clearly, according to an authoritative culinary encyclopedia, onions, garlic, chorizo, and peas are essential ingredients of paella, and I don't see any legitimate reason that the Wikipedia should say that they should be excluded. So, the photo stays, and the bit about how these ingredients are not part of "true" paella goes. —Nohat 06:00, 2004 Feb 20 (UTC)

I'm not going to start a war on this. The Larousse Gastronomique is wrong and it makes me sad to know that wikipedia will be wrong as well. I still think that Wikipedia must be an encyclopedia, not some form of organised google, so it should maintain the original and authentic recipes, and refer variations as what they are, variations. I would agree to put something milder such as "although purists won't agree, peas and chorizo can be seen on paellas all around the world (but very rarely in Spain)". I would also agree to create separate entries in wikipedia for all the variations, leaving paella for a "free or open-minded" paella, with links to specific paellas, starting from the Valencian and original one. We could work on this if you agree. Anyone wanting to work on this can contact me at "ploro@uv.es". -- Ploro, a Valencian

Nonetheless, I don't understand why foreigners have such an interest in instructing us what a paella is. I won't tell your recipes of paella to my grandma, she would die of a heart-attack. -- Jose, a Valencian

I think the fundamental problem here is the misguided belief that because paella originally came from Valencia, that somehow Valencians have dominion over defining what is and isn't paella. Valencians have no more authority to decide what is and isn't paella than the Neapolitans have in deciding what is and isn't pizza or in Texans declaring that "chili" can't have beans. They can only say "this is how we make it", but they really have no business telling others how to make it.

First of all, while I recognize that paella is originally a Valencian word, this is the English Wikipedia, and we write about the English meanings of words. In English there is a long tradition of words not meaning what some authority says they mean, but instead words mean what users mean them to mean. If the vast majority of English speakers mean by "paella" a dish that includes peas, then no matter how much some Valencian purists protest, "paella" means a dish with peas in English. I'll refrain from editing the article on the Spanish Wikipedia about "paella".

I guess it possible, likely even, given the franco-centric nature of the french writers who originally wrote the Gastronomique, that they are wrong about the traditional Valencian ingredients of paella.

Anyhow, I have removed the recipe to Wikibooks (a result of a discussion elsewhere about recipes on Wikipedia), so some of these details are no longer relevant. But it is important that the article be neutral in how it defines paella, without taking sides as to what is and isn't paella, but only what different people believe paella is or might not be.

— Nohat 16:48, 2004 Feb 24 (UTC)

I have reorganized the article now, and I think it better represents the traditional view of paella as well as the more liberal one, without taking sides. Please let me know if you still have problems with it. I think we should be able to fairly represent all views. —Nohat 18:06, 2004 Feb 24 (UTC)

I like the current solution very much and I agree with you on everything, including the peas and I'm sure Ploro will do as well. I'll put a better picture of the paella one of these days. Thank you. -- Jose, a Valencian.

Paella variations

I have had to continually edit this section as one user (both as an anonymous user and as a registered user) insists on modifying the last sentence, which mentions Vallencian rice. The change is from: "Portugal has a similar popular dish called Arroz à Valenciana (Valencian Rice)." to: "Portugal has a similar (and much better) popular dish called Arroz à Valenciana (Valencian Rice).

I have left an edit note within that section of the text and a message on that users talk page specifying that it was deleted for a reason (WP:NPOV) but if it happens for a 5th time I will be forced to seek administrator intervention. skorpion 10:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

New picture

The new picture on the top is not a Valencian Paella. It might be a kind of freestyle paella but it is not a Valencian Paella. I don't know why every two or three months, someone changes the main picture to a picture which has nothing to do with an authentic paella. The text already says (and it was forced to say this) that "paella" is understood in many different ways around the globe, but "Valencian Paella" is a term which is still understood as those paellas which stick to tradition. I suggest to recover the original picture as in: (http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paella) -- A Valencian.

I agree, but am not sure how to recover the picture. Can anyone help here? Fairsing 00:24, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Valencia, not Andalucía

Paella originated in Valencia, not Andalucía. Reverted. Tsk070 05:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I've added requests on the user's talk page for references or cites to support his position as well. Kuru ^talk 14:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but unfortunately right now the article says both that it originated there and that it didn't originate there. Can we choose a consistent point of view in one way or another until the issue is resolved? --ubiquity 20:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. It was a missed uncited change[1] by the same editor - he hit the XO page with his standard change on Nov 20th[2] with the same University of Kent IP. Kuru ^talk 21:15, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm Valencian. And this article is quite unprecise. Paella is original from Valencia, that's sacred. And the one we eat here, the original, never has peas, nor chorizo. It must always be cooked on a "Paellera", thats the secret, it doesnt state the same when cooked on an ordinary frying pan.

The first paellas where done by the farmers from l'Albufera (where many rice is seeded). It was made with rests of other foods. The it evolved, at those times it was common to put rat meat on it too. Nowdays, of course we don't put rat on nit, but rabbit and maybe chicken. / But I heard that the Paella was from Catalonia, is it part from Valencia or what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.38.225.41 (talk) 09:07, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

More inaccuracies

"Real paella rice is never stir-fried in oil, as pilaf."

This is plain wrong. The best paellas I've had all had the rice fried for a while before adding the water. It improves water absorption.

Besides, the word "real" is out of context, seeing the comments above about this document describing what "paella" means in English, rather than what a Valencian paella is.

69.181.148.6 07:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

If only there were some way that you could update the article! Rogerborg (talk) 15:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Major ingredients are not 'Rice, saffron and olive oil'. Rice and chicken perhaps. But saffron? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.59.128.201 (talk) 07:16, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Saffron is a vital ingredient that gives the dish its unique flavor.

As well as its characteristic colour... --Gibmetal 77 ^talk 02:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Religion of Spain

Was Spain always monotheistic? Sure, Spain the nation may have been Christian since the end of the Roman era, but the indigenous Iberians were certainly pagans and the Romans living there were pagans as well until the Christian era. Or did the pre-Christian Iberians and Hispanics simply not exist? That needs to be revised without the seemingly Catholic bias.

To claim that people in that land were ALWAYS monotheistic strikes me as laughably implausible.

--'Course it's implausible, because it's not true. There have been people in Spain much longer than there has been Christianity or Islam, and I doubt the population was entirely Jewish in, say, the time of the Roman Empire. But anyway. The real problem here is an unsubstantiated anecdote about some "priest" having a vision and creating paella, inserted by an anonymous user with a dubious edit history and poor typing skills. I have chosen to be bold and remove the offending text. Anyone want to quote a reputable source?--Craigkbryant (talk) 17:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC) ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥>33♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.250.205 (talk) 00:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Broth vs water to cook the rice

Most of the paella recipes I've read say the rice should be cooked in a broth rather than plain water. The broths are usually made by boiling one or some combination of the following: chicken, rabbit, clam (and less commonly; lobster, shrimp, mussels, fish filets, vegetables).

I personally use a combination of chicken broth and clam broth. I therefore am going to change the paragraph describing how to cook paella to reflect this and I will provide at least one citation. Pasta4470 (talk) 20:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the rice is not just cooked in plain water when making a paella. However, I would personally use the term stock rather broth to describe what the rice is cooked in. Does anyone else prefer this term? --Gibmetal 77 ^talk 21:24, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Removal of reference to puela

I'm Hispanic and I've never heard of the word puela. However, I'm not from New Mexico, so I checked for sources on the Internet but I couldn't find any. Even if it does exist, it's extremely non-standard, so I'm not sure it belongs here. The Thin Man Who Never Leaves (talk) 22:04, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

There you are, a reference. In these cases it's far better to tag with templates Dubious, Refimprove or the like, instead of just removing. --Jotamar (talk) 22:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Reliable references

I'm posting here as a reply to a request by JonCatalan to give advice on references for bringing this article up to FA standards. JonCatalan's question was whether there were enough online sources to support a high-quality history section on the paella. My guess is that it's highly doubtful that websites will be enough. If I came across a food history article I would be very skeptical to accpeting it as being of FA quality without print references. The current version of the article uses the website The Food Timeline as a reference, but the contents is really nothing but large snippets of text taken from print sources like The Oxford Companion to Food and The Food and Wines of Spain. If a website is nothing but a collection of quotes, then the reference might as well be directly to the books that are quoted.

A general recommendation for improving the article is to be careful about including too many curiosities, such as the largest paella ever made. It's bordering the trivial, but as long as it's incorporated in a wider context, it could work. (But it needs to be referenced.) The "Related dishes" list would also work better if it was converted to prose, preferably already in the lead. The etymology information in the lead work work better in a separate etymology-section where it could be fleshed out properly.

Peter ^Isotalo 11:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Recents edits of user 161.111.214.103

An editor who uses the above IP address has rewritten the lead with a very Valencian POV and has cited nothing to back up his/her claims. I'm going to restore it to its previous state. If he/she changes it back I suppose I'll have to put a neutrality tag on the article and seek the assistance of an administrator. LuisGomez111 (talk) 18:57, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Language (comment)

You have made some very good changes on the article lately, LuisGomez111.

But I still think that the fact that Valencians speak Catalan is not easy to understand, when reading the the introduction of the article, since there is no informatiomn on that so that one may understand this fact.

It is mentioned in the introduction that

the dish is originating in the Valencian autonomous region of Spain.

And later

The two most popular types of paella are Valencian paella and seafood paella.

And later

This dish has become enormously popular throughout much of the Spanish-speaking world, including the Hispanic regions of the United States. It also enjoys moderate popularity throughout Western Europe.

When people have read the introduction, putting this all together, all this may give the wrong information or impression to someone who doesn't know or doesn't have the right knowlege about this that Valencians speak Spanish, or are Spanish. Unless they happen to know what language is used in the Valencian autonomous region of Spain. (the Catalan speaking region).

This sould be mentioned in the begining of the article, since half of the article is about Valencians and their paella.

I put this on the discussion page because it is about the improvement of the article.

Warrington (talk) 09:23, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I can see that the problem is fixed. Not everyboby is avare of the differences, you know. Added some pictures.

Warrington (talk) 13:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Wording

We seem to have an editor (with multiple accounts) which does not fully understand the nature of wikipedia or has not read wp:own, or, most possibly, either.

He's chaging back to his version, and only his version, on the "grounds" that "there is nothing wrong with 'popularity' or 'enormously'"

No, indeed there is nothing wrong, but it can be improved. And there is nothing wrong either with removing "enormous" (an obvious peacock term) or with the word "acceptance".

As for "Valencians, many of whom speak the Valencian dialect of Catalan" that is self-evident clumsy and improvable wording which can be easily and more aptly replaced by "Valencian speakers" (at the Valencian article it is well clear the language's status and filiation, it is in that article and not this one where it belongs)

Take it easy, LuisGomez aka the thin man who never leaves...you can stay as long as you deem necessary, but you'll have to get used to get your beloved wording removed by other users.

You seem to be very aware of the 3RR as to break it yourself [3]. Cool, but I won't mind breaking it myself despite your threats and lack of cooperation attitude for as many times as it takes. Sorry. Mountolive _{le déluge} 20:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia will temporarily or permanently block your IP address if you violate the 3RR. Therefore, breaking it repeatedly is impossible. LuisGomez111 (talk) 01:06, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

That's all you have to say about my reasons? Depressing dude.

Dont worry, other users will have their say. Mountolive _{le déluge} 01:43, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I see you've made yet another baffling change to this article. Apparently, you like to delete first and ask questions later. Regarding the usage of chorizo in paella: While, this may not be common in Spain it is very common throughout Latin America and in Hispanic communities throughout the United States. I know this through my extensive travels. While I'm aware this constitutes personal research, there are no studies proving it (who would study such a thing?), so I'm forced to rely on my personal experience. As far as the meaning of the phrase "non-Valencian recipe" is concerned, here's what I meant: A Non-Valencian paella recipe is a recipe different from the traditional Valencian paella recipe. In fact I addressed this very issue in the article. Valencians are very sensitive about how people refer to paella, not what they put in it. They restrict the traditonal recipe to the list I provided in the article. If the paella contains seafood, Valencians believe it no longer deserves the name paella Valencian. I would be rather foolish to believe Valencians never put seafood in their paella. However, when they do, they call it either paella mixta or paella de marisco but never paella valenciana. However, it's the seafood version that is most popular throughout the world. The mixed version is most popular in Spain.

Having said all that, however, I can see that there is a larger issue at hand here. You have become obsessed with this article or perhaps obsessed with altering information I've written. Change it if you like. I will edit anything I see as unreasonable or incorrect later. However, if you violate Wikipedia policy, I will be quick to report you.

Also, I can't help but notice you never answered the comment I left for you on your talk page regarding Valencians speaking Catalan. Why not? Have you nothing left to say? By the way, don't call me "dude". I hate that. LuisGomez111 (talk) 02:19, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

So I "have become obsessed with this article"? Pay a look at the article history [4] and you'll see how ludicrous your claim is and who is actually obsessed. You have made (under your three different known identities) some 400 of the last 500 edits...so, obsessed who, you said?

As "obsessed with altering information you've written"...mate (is "mate" ok?) seriously...who do you think you are? are you having a bad week or you are always like that?

Your piece of text at my talk page is missing my point here. While you were asking to block me, I was giving reasoning here. So now you have to answer my reasoning, because instead of answering me, you wanted to use shortcuts (blocking people) so that no one "altered information you've written" (and, by the way, you did a poor job with that, so anxious you were to get a block...)

If you have any answer to my questions above, please go ahead. I'm willing to hear them. Mountolive _{le déluge} 02:37, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll be damned if I can make heads or tails of what you're trying to say here. Your writing is very convoluted. LuisGomez111 (talk) 02:43, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

International dish

Paella is also an International dish. Editors are focusing on Valencian paella, and use a lot of energy on discussing minor details, while missing out on the fact that paella like dishes are well-known in other countries, yet the article makes it sound like something inherently Valencian.

Could someone try to reduce the Valencian focus of the article a bit?

Bluee Mountain (talk) 14:21, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Maybe that could be easily solved if there was a section exclusively for Valencian paella (as made in the Valencian region) while the rest of the article was about the international dish and its variants. Mountolive _{le déluge} 14:35, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. If I remember correctly I wrote a lead stating that paella is "an internationally famous" dish but other editors accused me of using a peacock phrase. So I'll change it back. Also, breaking the article in two, Mountolive, strikes me as excessive. The history for both articles would be exactly the same up until the 20th century. Therefore, they would be near mirrors of each other. I did my best to track the history of paella with citations from its inception as an Arab rice casserole to its present day form as a seafood and rice dish. I fail to see how that's unbalanced. However, if either of you (Mountolive or Bluee Mountain) have well-cited historical infomation about paella then, by all means, add it. I can't help but notice, however, that after I expanded this article editors have been quick to criticize its wording but have made no effort to add new information. LuisGomez111 (talk) 17:43, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Reading the article history, and the discussion page, it is not easy to add anything to this article, mostly an effort in vain. Nevertheless, the aricle is not balanced and if there was a section exclusively for Valencian paella while the rest of the article was about the international dish and its variants, that would work nicely. Not necessarily "an internationally famous" dish, just an international dish. And I guess that you meant pea, in the paella , not pee. (Pee is a colloquial term for urine or the act of urination, from the first letter of piss). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluee Mountain (talk • contribs) 12:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC) Bluee Mountain (talk) 12:12, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Changes by Mountolive

Note LuisGomez111 has deleted his own comments after other users had responded to them. I am reinstating them below for the sake of conversation flow. Mountolive _{le déluge} 13:59, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I just had a look at the changes you've made. Your writing skills are so shockingly poor that it's comical. For instance, you may be surprised to learn that the word "recipe" is not spelled "recipee". Also, your sentence construction is often nonsensical. Here's one of your gems:

Also in the Albufera, there used to be a now nearly vanished recipee including a local rodent similar to the water vole.

First of all, as I stated earlier, there's no pee in the word recipe. Secondly there are two redundancies in the sentence: there used to be and now nearly vanished. Thirdly, you have no citations to back up your information. Finally instead of identifying the actual rodent Spaniards used to use in paella, you can only provide the name of one that’s similar to it: the water vole.

Here's another one of your monstrosities:

Later on, social life became more active with the sociological changes involved with the industrialization process.

I had to read this sentence several times before understanding it. You obviously started out with something I wrote and finished off with something barely intelligible. Here's a much better rewrite.

Later on, social life became more active with the changes of the industrial age.

There are other glaring mistakes but I'm not your English teacher so I intend to give you no more instruction. In short, instead of improving this article you've ruined it by adding irrelevant, uncited information and by inserting poorly written prose.

For the time being, however, I'm going to resist the urge to revert. I want to see what other gargantuan mistakes you make. Because, frankly, I'm curious to see just how remedial your writing skills are. Later I can always revert and/or ask for the assistance of an administrator in this matter.

Seriously dude you need to learn how to write. LuisGomez111 (talk) 22:27, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Luis, you might want to read the these links Wikipedia:edit war, Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:ownership of articles before this disagreement goes too far. Shinerunner (talk) 01:25, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Changes by Mountolive and my reaction

I'd like to apologize for the previous version of my reaction to Mountolive's changes. I was very angry when I wrote it and I lashed out. Below is a kinder version:

I just had a look at the changes you've made. Unfortunately, your writing skills need help. For instance, you spelled "recipe" as "recipee". Also, your sentence construction is clumsy. Here's an example of something you wrote.

Also in the Albufera, there used to be a now nearly vanished recipee including a local rodent similar to the water vole.

First of all, as I stated earlier, there's no pee in the word recipe. Secondly there are two redundancies in the sentence: there used to be and now nearly vanished. Thirdly, you have no citations to back up your information. Fourth, instead of identifying the actual rodent Spaniards formerly put in paella, you've provided the name of one that’s similar to it: the water vole. And last, but not least, why would you include uncited information on an ingredient Spaniards have stopped using?

Here's another example:

Later on, social life became more active with the sociological changes involved with the industrialization process.

I had to read this sentence several times before understanding it. You obviously started out with something I wrote and finished off with your own rewrite. Here's my improvement:

Later on, social life became more active with the changes of the industrial age.

There are other mistakes as well.

I was very disappointed when I read your changes because you added irrelevant, uncited information and inserted poorly written prose.

For the time being, however, I'm going to resist the urge to revert to give you time to make these corrections. If you fail to do this I can always revert and/or ask for the assistance of an administrator in this matter. LuisGomez111 (talk) 13:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, in this case I will use the opportunity to create some sections. Bluee Mountain (talk) 14:31, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I didn't chaanged what it was written in the article, just moved around some of it, in order to fit them into the new sections. You may correct it if I made some mistakes. These changes may make things more clear, so that Mr Mountolive will understand why sausage is used in certain paellas and not in others.

I'd like to apologize myself. After taking the time to study the changes made by Mr Mountolive, I have to say that I understand why Mr Gomez got angry. Bluee Mountain (talk) 15:42, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Present state of this article

I worked quite hard to improve this article when I first noticed it was slightly better than a stub. Frankly, I wish I had never touched it because I can see now all my work has gone to waste.

In two short days it has gone from being accurate and well written to its present state as a disorganized morass of unreliable information; thus my angry reaction to Mountolive's edits who is largely to blame for this article's demise.

I can see now that putting in any further time or effort would be pointless. Tear it apart, if you like, or delete it, for that matter. I no longer care. LuisGomez111 (talk) 03:33, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Now, be serious Mr Gomez. Don't take it so hard. Ewerything is there, with some minor changes. I tried to restore some of it myself. You can go on working on it. Articles do change over the time, it is not a tragedy. Some changes are maybe for the better. I think giving the Valencians their own section may cause less conflicts in the future with stubborn Valencian editors. You can go on improving it, if you think that you disagree with some things. Thats Wikipedia is made for.

Bluee Mountain (talk) 14:26, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what this nutrality thing is. --Texas Pete —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.139.19.214 (talk) 21:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

That is presenting a topic in a balanced way, from a general point of wiew, and not favoring one particular point of wiew or ideology.

Bluee Mountain (talk) 11:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

RfC: History of the development of Paella

I have added the above RfC tag as the first step in dispute resolution since several editors now seem to be in conflict over how to write the history section of this article.

Mountolive: As Bluee Mountain has pointed out, you have a habit of removing cited information without reason. Also, you include information that obviously constitutes personal research and you have a tendency to revert and delete without discussion. Most of this occurs in the history section of this article which baffles me because I did my best to provide accurate citations. Also, Texas Pete (anonymous user:169.139.19.214) has taken it upon himself to revert the article to a previous version I wrote. While flattering, it probably was not the most tactful course of action. I also noticed there is a conflict between Pete and Bluee involving a neutrality dispute. I have replaced Bluee's subsection divisions in an attempt to resolve this dispute and I removed the neutrality tag. However, Bluee, if you still feel the tag needs to be there then, by all means, put it back. I removed it because your complaint was that there should be a separate section for Valencian history. The dispute seems resolved now that the article has that. Pete, so far, has not objected.

Please give me your opinions. LuisGomez111 (talk) 04:27, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

The dispute is resolved. The article is a very good one, compared to what it was 2006 and 2007. I think that is good that someone is keeping on eye on it, otherwise it would deteriorate rapidly, as it did before. Bluee Mountain (talk) 20:02, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I would only like to add a few more words. I added before, “in which it is prepared” or “in wich is made in”, to this sentence:The word paella derives from the Latin word patella for pan.

I was reading the talk page, and the citation from the Larousse Gastronomique, “Its name is derived from that of the container in which it is prepared (paellera)”. And it was the first time I realized the connection between the name and the pan. There might be others too who are just as slow in understanding this, like me. Bluee Mountain (talk) 19:45, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

wording

"Valencians, many of whom speak the Valencian dialect of Catalan" certainly sounds convoluted.

On the one hand, it is redundant "VALENCIANs speak the VALENCIAN dialect..." sure, we supposed that already. On the other hand is misleading, for it could lead someone to think that, reversely, some other Valencians speak some other dialect of Catalan.

Last and not least, it is an obvious wp:weasel expression: how many are "many"?

I would therefore replace "Valencians, many of whom speak the Valencian dialect of Catalan" by, simply, "Valencian speakers". Then, at the Valencian article the status of Valencian regarding Catalan and other philological questions are very clear, whereas philological questions do not belong in this particular article.

As for the claim to be removed being sourced, that is by and large irrelevant in this case. After all, we are not making philological comments on, say, this other claim "French poele", by adding something like "French is a Romanic language" line or similar. Even if it was properly cited, it would not belong in here. Besides, far better sources and quotes regardind the dialectological status of Valencian than those in here are provided at the Valencian article proving the status. All in all, these sources are just a click away in the relevant article.

In other words, the fact that some Valencian speak a dialect of Catalan is absolutely irrelevant to the substance of this article, while "Valencian speakers" keeps the sentence much more synthetic and neat while not affecting the sense of the sentence.

So, Luis, if you and your several alter egos loose your grip in this article at least with this one edit, which is meant as a minor after all, then I will be gone from here and willing to leave it for your next 500 great additions.

I'll be looking in here to see your answer. Mountolive _{le déluge} 23:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

If removing that phrase is that important to you then I won't revert it. However, I originally included it at the insistence of user:Warrington (read his/her last entry on this talk page). I originally felt, as you do, that a discussion of language didn't belong in this article. I included it only out of a sense of compromise. However, if Warrington sees that you removed it, he/she may replace it. You then can argue with him/her, if you like, or any other editor who reverts you.

By the way, I just had a look at the revision stats. I've made a total of 51 edits to this article. I don't know how you reached the conclusion that I've made 500. Also, I'm not quite sure what you mean by "alter egos". I operate three legitimate accounts and no others. The other editors making changes to this article are different people altogether. They are NOT my sock puppets. LuisGomez111 (talk) 01:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Stop insulting people, MOUNTOLIVE, will you! Behave yourself. And yes it is relevant for the article since it is one of its subjects. Guess you are a Catalan yourself, so these things are wery clear for you, in detail. But this is an encyclopedia and things need to be briefly explained, once you introduce a subject in the article, for other less informed ones. And not many people want or have the patience to read a whole article about Valencians, they just want to know about the paella.

AND IF THEY DO, THIS IS WHAT THEY FIND: Valencian (valencià) is the historical, traditional, and official name used in the Valencian Community of Spain to refer to the region's native language, known elsewhere as Catalan (català). And this is elswhere, namely the English Wikipedia, not the Spanish or the Valencian (the link goes to that Català ca:Paella) , like it or not.

Are the Valencians different fron the rest of Spain or not?

Otherwise the article is a high quality food and drink article (some of them are quite messy, I know because I a am working with them), and it is that thanks to Luis, so please be polite when you are addressing him! Warrington (talk) 08:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words, Warrington. LuisGomez111 (talk) 12:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Come on! This talk page is getting crazy as hell. Warrington should also take a look at WP:CIVIL before engaging discussions in this angry tone.--Carles Noguera (talk) 13:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. But perhaps you should study the history of the article and see for yourself what happened. Civility is not Mountolive's strong side.

I can remove some exclamation marks. And I don't think anyone would prefer this instead:

Paella is cooked in a paella pan, which is a large, shallow, flat pan. An important part of the flavor comes from the addition of saffron and the sofrito, or the combination of tomatoes, and garlic (and sometimes peppers). First the meat, and then the vegetables are stir fried in olive oil; subsequently water is added and brought to a boil, and left boiling for half an hour or so. (This, however, is not the sole method utilized in the preparation. Many chefs add the water, allow it to come to the boil and at that moment add the rice.) Later, after checking the obtained broth flavour and adding salt if required, the rice is added. The rice in Valencian paella is never stir-fried in oil, as pilau, though the paella made further southwest of Valencia often is. Once the rice is nearly done, the paella is removed from the heat and left to absorb the remaining water. Traditional paella has a crispy, caramelized, toasted bottom (called socarrat in Valencian) that is considered a delicacy. To achieve a socarrat, one either needs to time the evaporation of the water properly with the completion of the rice being cooked or turn up the heat to high and listen to the bottom of the rice toast. Once the aroma of toasted rice comes from the pan, but before the rice burns, the heat is removed once again. The paella is ready to be served after having cooled for several minutes.

That's about everything the article was two month ago. Nobody should be insulted because they work hard on improving an article. Warrington (talk) 15:32, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Encyclopedical knowledge

This part about the Valencian language is encyclopedical knowledge, belonging to the article, explaining who Valencians are, since the Valencians are mentioned in the article, several times. Valencians are distinct in origin from the other inhabitants of Spain, from whom they differ in their dialect (or language). The issue of whether Catalan and Valencian constitute different languages or merely dialects has been the subject of political agitation several times since the end of the Franco era (citation Wikipedia Catalan language, The status of Valencian). The article should summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies that may exist. As a compromise this note was added as a footnote, since you, Mountolive, was making it impossible to add any information about the language to the main article which was mentioning “Catalan” in any way. The article on Catalan language states that Catalan is a Romance language, the national and official language of Andorra, and a co-official language in the Spanish autonomous communities of the Balearic Islands, Catalonia and Valencian Community—where it is known as Valencian— and in the city of Alghero in the Italian island of Sardinia. The official language academy of the Valencian Community (the Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua) considers Catalan and Valencian simply to be two names for the same language ^[1]. = , =ref>Dictamen de l'Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua sobre els principis i criteris per a la defensa de la denominació i l'entitat del valencià - Report from Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua about denomination and identity of Valencian.</ref.. All universities teaching Romance languages, and virtually all linguists, consider these all to be linguistic variants of the same language (similar to Canadian French versus Metropolitan French). You are Valencian, Mountolive and you are “ pushing your POV” that the Valencian constitute a different language from the Catalan. The footnote is presenting this issue in a neutral way, as neutral as it is possible, without stating if it is a language or a if it is dialect, only pointing out this controversial issue. Please do not remove it again.

Warrington (talk) 09:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Warrington, I agree with all these sources you mention, and I agree with Valencian being a Catalan dialect, which means that you are barking at the wrong tree if you think that I am "pushing my POV that the Valencian constitute a different language from the Catalan" whatsoever.

The thing is that this article is about a dish, about food, not about linguistics, not about politics. Hence, this "encyclopedial knowledge" does not belong in here. This issue is discussed in the right place, that is, the Valencian article. As LuisGomez points out here at an archived part of your talk page [5] whatever Valencians speak is hardly central to the paella article. I'll be more blunt: it is actually not related in any way.

If we were to take the "enclyclopedical knowledge" rationale, then, we should be opening multiple footnotes speaking of Welsh, Old Spanish, French philological filiation, or, why not, any other thing mentioned in the article.

On the face of it, two users disagree with this philological so-called "footnote". Therefore, unless a plurality of users came to support your case (and, with all due respect, I am talking at users not living in your same household) then it must be removed for keeping the article's integrity. Mountolive _{le déluge} 01:30, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

It is also quite clear to me that an entry about a traditional dish has in principle nothing to do with neither linguistics nor politics. That's not the place for POV-pushing anything about the Valencian controversy (BTW, nowadays almost dead controversy). Moreover, Warrington is completely wrong if he thinks that Mountolive wants to support any fringe theory about that. So, unless Warrington can come up with some strong rationale why such a footnote must be included in the article, I think that it should be just removed. --Carles Noguera (talk) 16:22, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Why the user ChickenChorizoRice has reverted my contributions?

Why my contributions have been removed without an explanation?

I'm a valencian cooker, this is a free enciclopedia, and my contributions have enriched the article.

Etymology

I don't understand why you placed the dubious tag in the etymology section, especially since it's well cited. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 14:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

The root is a romance one, that might be Indo-european, or not. The Welsh padell is most probably a latin loanword, otherwise the same root should be present in many other Indo-european tongues. --Jotamar (talk) 14:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

The Indoeuropean root for the Latin patella is *petə-. I have used the following link as a citation in the article: http://www.myetymology.com/english/patella.html. Therefore, I am removing the dubious tag in the etymology section. In the interest of fair play, I will also remove the dubious tag I placed in the article's first paragragh despite the absence of a citation. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 16:14, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

There is still a big misconception about etymologies here: all the words mentioned clearly derive from Latin patella, and Welsh padell most probably stems from it too. Citing the IE root here is like introducing one of your brothers as someone who shares an ancestor with me. --Jotamar (talk) 15:20, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand your point. I provided the IE root to show the similarity between it and the Welsh padell, thus providing a plausible derivation. Saying that padell probably derives from patella hardly constitutes proof. You must provide a citation. However, I find the etymology section of this article too lengthy. After all, this is an article about a recipe not an etymology lesson. I'm going to shorten it. If you don't like it, feel free to rewrite it however you like. I doubt very much I'll wind up changing it again. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 02:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

This article mentions Valencia too often

I was editing the lead paragraph for the millionth time when it struck me how often Valencia or things Valencian come up. I counted 37 uses of these two words, including sub heads and references in Spanish. I'm aware that Valencians are the ones who developed the recipe but do we really need to bring this up more than once or perhaps a maximum of twice? This is a WP food and wine article. It's not an article about Valencian culture. Nor is it an article about Valencian cuisine. Also, the lead paragraph reads like a travel brochure for Valencia.

It would be great if other non-Valencian editors besides me were to edit this article to make it more neutral. I've already edited the hell out it. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 20:39, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I just removed several references to Valencia. I could have gone a bit farther but frankly I'm afraid of starting an edit war with the Valencian editors. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 00:03, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion to add common mispronunciation in English-speaking countries

Since lots of people can't read phonetics, and in order to point out how this word should and should not be pronounced to the great masses of English-speaking non-Spanish-speakers (especially in Australia, New Zealand and Britain) who call it "pay-ella" or "pie-ella" (the "ella" rhyming with "fella") I'd like to suggest we add some kind of pronunciation guide for non-phonetics-readers to explain that the 'ella' is pronounced more like 'eyya' by Spaniards (or at least to show that the els are pronounced like y, and perhaps also mention that in South America it's pronounced 'ejja' or 'edga', though that sound would be particularly hard to describe without phonetics). What do people think? (Please see bruschetta, top of page, for an example of something like what I'm thinking of.)--Tyranny Sue (talk) 05:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. Do it. But, for the future, you don't need to ask anybody's permission. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 13:16, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Garlic in Valencian paella

To Coentor: Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Paella. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you.

Please note that Juanry Segui and Juan Galbis (both prominent Valencian chefs) include garlic in Valencian paella. See the following links to their web sites:

Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Official web page of the Valencian community tourist organisation. here you can find the basic recipe of paella. If you want more recipes of paella without the garlic, there are tons in the internet.

Notice that Paella is a dish that traditionally has been cooked with the things that peasant had in their fields, so there are plenty of recipes. If the wikipedia wants to have a NEUTRAL point of view about what is a paella, has to go to the basic paella recipe, that means only put the ingredients that everyone puts in a paella. Garlic in paella, specially in Valencia (I don't talk about mixt paella, very rare in Valencia, except maybe in some interior parts like Alcoi) is very rare. --Coentor (talk) 14:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

You've cited a tourist organization. Such a group hardly qualifies as a repository for culinary expertise. I, on the other hand, have cited two prominent Valencian chefs. Chefs obviously know more about cooking than any tourist organization. Despite this, I recognize you may very well be right but you must provide citations from credible sources to prove your point. If you find such citations for this recipie without garlic, however, then we will have credible sources in disagreement. If that occurs then the article should mention this disagreement. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 16:05, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, the tourist organisation is the official organisation of the Valencian goverment. it's not just a tourist organisation, we have to presume that the Valencian goverment has resources and can present a reliable recipe of their national dish. Here you can find the recipe of paella given in the description of Cullera's "Casa Salvador" Valencian paella description [6](click on the third dish) and you can see that no garlic is listed. Casa Salvador is a local famous restaurant.

As we agreed, paella is presented in lots of forms. Due your sources, snails and duck would be also important ingredients of the paella, when the truth is that duck is only traditional in the paellas of the "Ribera" county, near L'albufera and lots of chefs avoid snails because they find them disgusting. We even have source citation of prominent Valencian writer Blasco Ibáñez on where he relates that people even used to put rat in the Paella and we're not putting it as an ingredient. Artichokes, meatballs (in the Ribera) and even peas (something that, like garlic, I see as blasphemous) are put by some chefs into the paella. That's why I propose to remove garlic in the recipe of the paella (if it can be listed as an optional ingredient in the "history" section, as artichokes, duck and others are listed) and let for the recipe the most basic recipe, that that includes the ingredients imprescindible in any paella : rice, oil,water, tomato,saffron, chicken and rabbit, bajoqueta and garrofó vegetables, snails and rosemary in brench. And then mention that paella can be tuned with lots of ingredients at chefs (or eaters) discretion. --Coentor (talk) 20:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Your answer here is very confusing. I had a close look at the website for Casa Salvador. It doesn't have a single recipe. Also you keep asserting the culinary expertise of a tourism organization. Whether it's official or not, its expertise has nothing to do with the culinary arts but rather tourism. Please cite a Valencian chef or at the very least a Valencian cookbook showing that Valencian paella has no garlic. Keep in mind I'm only asking you what I've already done twice. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 02:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

___

The link in casa salvador has not the recipe, but has the list of ingredients: the basic are listed, garlic not. If you have'nt found (yes, flash sucks) is the third dish in "arrossos" (rices)

More links (you will need a catalan-english translator, if don't speak our language) On here the owner of the blog talks about the valencian sociologist Josep Vicent Marquès and the paella. Interessant parts of the text: they put two recipes, the "canonical" (what better to a wikipedia than a canon? and that he does at his home.

La recepta ultraortodoxa: estri, ingredients i tècnica

És d’aquest origen popular i camperol que surt la recepta ultraortodoxa, la que les fonts més xiites atribueixen la condició de paella única i vertadera. La recepta l’he treta del llibre del Marquès que ja us he citat, però la trobareu gairebé idèntica a "El gust d’un poble", del Jaume Fàbrega i molt més fàcil de localitzar. Aquí van els ingredients per a 10 persones (penseu que és un plat social!):

   * 1 quilo d’arròs
   * 2′5 cops el volum d’aigua que el que ocupi l’arròs (això és clau!!!!)
   * 3 quilos de carn de pollastre; o pollastre i conill barrejats
   * 1/4 de quilo de tomata madura
   * 350 grans de bajoqueta de ferradura (orientals: mongeta tendra de l’ampla; vinarossencs: fesolets dels amples)
   * 1/4 de quilo de fesols de garrofa; o garrofó tendres (una mongeta / fesolet propi del País Valencia; vegeu-lo aquí)
   * 2 decilitres d’oli d’oliva
   * Una cullerada rassa de pebre roig, un pessic de safrà i sal
   * Com a ingredient opcional es pot posar unes vaquetes o xonetes, dos tipus de cargols de muntanya.
   * Altres opcions de temporada són fesols de tavella (perona o finets, segons on visqueu), a l’estiu o unes carxofes a l’hivern (llavors, els plat agafa el nom tan fascinant de paella d’hivern…)

The recipe ultraortodox: utensil, ingredient and technique

It is popular in this country and leaving the recipe ultraortodox, which sources attributed the condition and only true paella. The recipe I put out the book of Marquès that I have already mentioned, but found almost identical in "the taste of a people", of Jaume Fàbrega and much easier to locate. Here are the ingredients for 10 people (think it is a social dish!)

    * 1 kilo of rice
    * 2.5 times the volume of water that fills the rice (this is key !!!!)
    * 3 pounds of chicken, rabbit or chicken and mixed
    * 1 / 4 kilo of ripe tomato
    * 350 large horseshoe bajoqueta (Eastern: beans of the broad, vinarossencs: widths of fesolets)
    * 1 / 4 kilo of beans of carob; tender or carob (bean / fesolet own Valencia Country; see it here)
    * 2 decilitres of olive oil
    Rassa * A teaspoon of red pepper, a pinch of saffron and salt
    * The optional ingredient can be put together or some xonetes, two types of screws mountain.
    * Other options are season tavella of beans (or Perona FINET as where they live), a summer or winter artichokes (then, the dish takes the name of pan fascinating winter ...)

Other interessant part: he talks about garlic: "Reading in Marquès and Fabregat I get an unexpected debate, which is across with Pau arenós, does the paella have garlic? According to the first two (provided the recipe), no. According Amorós and my family did. Put together well with chopped tomatoes, forming what in my environment we have always said that picaeta and is complemented with a little parsley. I think I have ever tried without a paella without garlic. For me do picaeta (a grain for all eaters) is the fourth key of a good frying pan with the sauce, the size of water and the way they distribute the rice."

Notice that the recipe of the blog owner, the one that includes garlic, includes other things as pig rib. Here we have a recipe with pig rib but without garlic [7].

And notice that (even when in the first case is a Sociologist and not a chef) he mentions two books with the "ultraorthodox" recipe: JV Marquès in "Els millors arrossos valencians." and "El gust d'un poble" of Jaume Fàbrega

More recipes: [8], [9] maybe they've not a prestigious chef behind, but I believe that we can see that garlic is not imprescindible in the Paella recipe. --Coentor (talk) 09:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Garlic in Valencian Paella

I included the word "optional" next to each instance of the word "garlic" for Valencian paella. Please include the appropriate references. Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 13:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

;) Done. --Coentor (talk) 14:00, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Changes by anonymous user 70.118.117.231

This above user made many uncited claims (most involving the use of MSG in paella) and inserted many opinions. I removed them all. Below are other changes I made:

I removed two images because the article had too many. It had a total of eight, three of those being of seafood paella.
I moved the Valencian paella pic out of the info box and placed it further down the article to help correct a visual imbalance created by all the pics.
I included templates for Wikibook paella recipes for each type of paella in this article and associated already existing pics with them.
I shortened the captions associated with four pics because I found them too wordy.

Moby-Dick3000 (talk) 16:46, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Recipies

I removed all of them as per WP:NOTHOW. Arts n Sci (talk) 02:30, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a cookbook, but for an article about a dish that is obviously encyclopedic, a very basic cooking method is a relevant section. Invoking WP:NOT here is rather narrow-minded. I revert. --Jotamar (talk) 18:58, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

^ Dictamen de l'Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua sobre els principis i criteris per a la defensa de la denominació i l'entitat del valencià - Report from Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua about denomination and identity of Valencian.

[1] Dictamen de l'Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua sobre els principis i criteris per a la defensa de la denominació i l'entitat del valencià - Report from Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua about denomination and identity of Valencian.

[1]