Talk:Cotechino

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Creating the page[edit]

I created the page since Cotechino Modena is just a kind of Cotechino, and not the sole product of this typical Italian charcuterie. Filippo83 (talk) 14:01, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merger from Cotechino Modena[edit]

After 12 years, there is essentially nothing here that is not in common with Cotechino, not even the definition of the PGI or a link to it (which could easily be a section of a unified article). --Macrakis (talk) 17:49, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, clearly a spinoff isn't justified by WP:NOPAGE, and both can be treated within the same article. IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 12:29, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Great support. JacktheBrown (talk) 14:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm an oppose; a PGI product seems like it's likely notable enough for its own article. The fact no one has taken on the research on such products often has to do with research difficulties in languages you don't speak or read; I had a silly amount of difficulty with Sorana bean, as I don't read Italian and had to get a friend who did to translate a source that wasn't available online, which meant I couldn't use a machine translation. And a Sorana bean could be argued to simply be a cannelini; Sorana is twice as long as cannelini and has three times the references. Cotechino/Cotechino Modena have different wikidata items and multiple wikipedias have both articles, including it.wiki. We could, however, edit one of these into Zampone Modena (stuffed into pig's trotters) and the other into Cotechino Modena (stuffed into intestines), both PGI foods. Valereee (talk) 15:55, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Valereee: I greatly appreciate the effort made by the English, Americans, etc. on articles such as carbonara, amatriciana, pizza, and so on; also thanks to me (I have contributed a lot to many articles on Italian cuisine), the pages in this encyclopaedia concerning Italian food are better than those in en.wiki (with some exceptions, for example piadina romagnola isn't a good article in en.wiki), but this language barrier is very unpleasant. It seems strange to me, because if I want to have a more complete idea about something in which the United States and Russia (example) are involved, I also look for sources in British English, Italian, Russian, French, German, Swiss, Swedish, Ukrainian, Japanese, Chinese, Mexican, etc., not just American English; it would be enough to use good translators, such as DeepL Translate and PONS, and then work hard to improve the translation, because, obviously, machine translators aren't impeccable. JacktheBrown (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • @JackkBrown, not sure what you mean by this language barrier is very unpleasant, can you clarify what language barrier you mean and what you mean by unpleasant?
        I, too, often try to research in other languages, including by checking to see if a food or dish appears in the wikipedia of its country of origin or neighboring countries, and often use machine translation. One of the problems for me is knowing what to search for in the first place. Often there are multiple names for a food, and often there are transliteration issues. For instance, Yongfeng chili sauce is rendered in Chinese as 永丰辣酱 and in pinyin as Yǒngfēng làjiàng. In machine translation it is sometimes rendered as Yongfeng hot sauce or Yongfeng spicy sauce. Kartoffelklöße is called kartoffelklösse or erdäpfelknödel or reiberknödel or gleeß or gneedl or gniedla or klueß, depending on which country or region or state.
        Generally this means I have to have stumbled across the food somewhere. And even once I have stumbled across it, I may have missed different names, and sometimes even the same name has multiple transliterations depending on the language. Sometimes it's difficult to know whether a machine translation that sounds like it might be referring to the same food actually is.
        I'm willing to do that work, and in fact I wrote Kartoffelklöße after stumbling over the term on a German-speaking editor's user pages, where she documents her travels and the food she eats while traveling. I found Yongfeng chili sauce at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Yongfeng_Chili_Sauce and improved it to the point xtools lists me as its primary editor. I do so much work at foods and dishes from other countries that other editors commonly ping me to AfC or AfD for such articles, and I regularly am able to save an article that otherwise was headed for deletion. But in general I do have to know there is such a food before I can do the work.
        A complicating factor is often assessing the sources as to their reliability and independence. I'm not as familiar with sources in other languages as I am with sources in English. Is an Italian source, used in the it.wiki article about a food, reliable or not? The simple fact it.wiki uses it isn't enough, as other wikis have different requirements. Sometimes it's not easy to tell, especially when we also don't have an article about the source itself. I'm always happy when I find an editor who is familiar with sources in a particular language, and in fact include editors who have expertise in particular language sources at User:Valereee#Expertise. Valereee (talk) 12:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Valereee: wow, you really do a great job! With the phrase this language barrier is very unpleasant I refer to the language barrier between English and Italian, "unpleasant" because there's Italian cultural information that's not added here precisely because this language barrier almost prevents it. However, if you need information on Italian food contact me, I have much knowledge about Italian cuisine. JacktheBrown (talk) 12:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cotechino&oldid=1226448581"