Talk:Laksa

Served in

The article repeated "X laksa is served in Y", which makes no sense -- it implies that laksa is a mysterious X something dropped into a Y before serving. Instead, curry laksa is a curry-based noodle soup and that's what it says now. Jpatokal 16:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Sarawak laksa is entirely a different type of laksa.

If you want to categorize the Sarawak laksa, you should at least categorize it under Curry Laksa instead of Asam Laksa this is because it is more similar to the curry laksa, not the asam laksa. Otherwise, it should be classified as a different type of laksa as the Sarawak laksa's soup is neither curry nor fish gravy at all.

P/s: Singapore laksa is the bomb. I love it. (Matt McSales 15:41, 10 June 2007 (UTC))

Laksam is related to Asam Laksa!

Another fact that you guys got mixed up is the Kelantanese Laksam. It should be categorized under asam laksa as it is preepared like asam laksa. That's why it's called Laksam, acronym for Laksa Asam. (Matt McSales 15:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC))

Err,

== no. The laksam I've had has always been rich, coconutty, and completely non-assam. I agree that it's a "fish paste" laksa, not a "curry" laksa, but it hardly qualifies as assam if it's not sour! See eg. [1]. Jpatokal 16:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I think we need to develop a two-dimensional laksa matrix: coconut vs non-coconut, and fish paste vs curry. Jpatokal 03:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

	Coconut	Assam
Curry	Laksa lemak Katong laksa	Sarawak laksa
Fish paste	Johor laksa Laksam	Penang laksa Ipoh laksa

I think you should also add, Laksa from Indonesia...As you know, there are also some Laksas found in Jakarta, called Laksa Betawi, as well as Laksa Bogor. And you should also know about Laksa served in Tangerang (Banten Province)

Box

The transliterations in the box are either hidden or don't appear at all. This is no good. The transliterations should appear. Badagnani 03:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Box, again

Shouldn't the Hokkien name be included in the box? Badagnani 03:44, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

What is the name of the noodle itself?

Is "laksa" the name of the dish, or the uncooked/raw noodle itself? Badagnani 23:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it's the name of the dish. Chensiyuan 00:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The dish. The noodles used vary greatly between versions. Jpatokal 02:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

To clarify my own comment: these is one type of noodle known as "laksa noodle", which may or may not be used in laksa. See Talk:Chinese noodles#Laksa. Jpatokal 05:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Persian laksa?

Regarding this, I'd like to see a few more scholarly sources than a Middle Eastern cookbook for this rather unusual theory. Bald assertions like ""laksa" must have been an old Malay dish" are not encyclopedic. Jpatokal 05:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Persian "Laksha" vs. Sanskrit "Laksha"

I found out that the term "laksha" is a Medieval Persian word for "noodle" from a book by Ghillie Basan, The Middle Eastern Culinary (2001) p.125. If someone is not satisfied, you may check it from the book. Now, the Iranians refer to "noodle" as "reshteh".

If Laksa is originated from the Chinese, it would not be that spicy. Futhermore if Malays adopt a dish from another culture, they would retain the name of the ingredient. For example, Malay refer to "noodle" as "mee" or "mi" and they do not give any Sanskrit name to it.

The same goes with "rice vermicelli", the Malays refer to it as "bee hoon" or "bihun" and "koey tiaw" or "keutiau", depending on the size of the pasta. We called chapati, "roti capati" which undeniably has some Urdu origin in its name. We called cake, "kek". We maintained the English pronunciation but we use our own spelling system.

I am strongly against the original article of 'Laksa' which depicted as though Laksa comes from the Peranakan Chinese. The Peranakan Chinese simply improvised it. If one comes to the north of Malaysia and taste the authentic Kedah Laksa, one will understand that Laksa is undoubtedly a Malay dish. The gravy is distintively Malay with the "daun kesum", "bunga kantan", "belacan", chillies, the dried sliced "gelugor" and the ground fish flesh. There is no Chinese influence at all in it. We do not use fish balls or fish cakes. In fact, even during my childhood days in the 1970s, my grandmother used to make the homemade fresh rice noodle by herself. We do not use any version of Chinese dried rice noodle. The Chinese dried rice noodle is definitely a much later improvisation or for the matter of convenience.

If one comes from Singapore, one will think Laksa is a Peranakan Chinese invention. Only if you are born in the north Malaysia, then only you can understand the Malayness of Laksa. As the Penang Chinese developed their own version of Penang Laksa, the use of "petis" (shrimp caramel) also become acceptable to the Malays. I guess Laksa in a way bind the Malays and Chinese together.

I find the argument that the word laksa derive from Sankrit "laksha" is rather hilarious. In the olden days, before the coming of the British, Malays did use the word 'laksa' to mean 5 figures amount in number. Now the term has become obsolete and has been replaced with "puluh ribu". That 'laksa' definitely derive from Sanskrit. Why should we refer to a dish in terms of mathematical figure? Furthermore when I read the book by Basan, she does not trying to justify that laksa is a Persian invention. She was talking about wheat and about an old version of noodle that Persians used to produce hundred of years ago. Nothing in the book ever mention about South East Asian laksa. By knowing that "laksha" was the word for "noodle" in Medieval Persian, then it strikes me that laksa derive from the very same word.

If one want to know more about the arrival of Persian traders in Kedah several centuries ago which is archaeologically supported, you may visit the Lembah Bujang Archaeological Museum in Merbok, Kedah in northern Malaysia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrinaomar (talk • contribs) 06:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

A few of your assertions are obviously wrong. There are lots of spicy Chinese dishes in Malaysia/Singapore: chilli crab, mee pok, etc. Sanskirt (via Hindi/Tamil) words are used in Malay, consider eg. the words roti, raja, putra, suka, utara etc and go read up on Old Malay, "heavily influenced by Sanskrit".

More importantly, though, Wikipedia does not care what you think. You need to show some scholarly research for these claims and no, a cookbook is not enough.

So here's the entry for laksa in an etymological dictionary of Singlish:

laksa /lahk-sah, ÈlAksA/ n. [Mal., a mixture of vermicelli and fish-paste (Winstedt; Wilkinson says the term is < Hind. & Pers. lakhshah a kind of vermicelli (NMS suggests Pers. laksha vermicelli), but the word has not been found in McGregor or Palmer); poss. < Skt. लकशस् lakshas, लकशम् laksham a lac, one hundred thousand (Monier-Williams), f. its numerous ingredients (see September 2006 quot.) (> Hind. लख lakh (chiefly a prefix) one hundred thousand; fig. a vast number; लकश lakṣ one hundred thousand (McGregor)); or perh. < Pers. لخشه lakhsha, لخشك lakhshak a type of frumenty (a dish made of hulled wheat boiled in milk, and seasoned with cinnamon, sugar, etc.), a certain sweetmeat (Johnson)]

That's at least three different derivations for the term. They should definitely all be covered here in Wikipedia, but I don't see how you can assert that one of them is Right and the others are Wrong.

Also, regardless of where the word laksa comes from, I think it's pretty clear that the dish in anything like its present form originates in Malaya. Jpatokal 16:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Laksa : Some further anecdote

I found the term "lakhsha" from the book The Middle Eastern Kitchen by Ghillie Basan, published by Kyle Cathy Limited (2001). The book emphasizes on the Middle Eastern cuisine and was talking about the essential ingredients of the Middle Eastern cuisine. The term "lakhsha" appeared under the heading of Wheat at page 125.

She mentioned, and allow me to quote it in verbatim,

"[M]edieval culinary manuals refer to fresh noodles as lakhsha, a Persian word and to dry noodles as itriyya. By the thirteenth century, the word lakhsha was replaced by rishta (reshteh in Farsi) also a Persian word which is what the noodles are called today."

Well, I guess this is clear how the Malays got the term laksa. Please do not tell me that the Peranakan Chinese invented the dish and gave it a Persian name. Even if the original writer of the laksa article considers the Sanskrit word as the origin for the word laksa, but why on earth the Singaporean Peranakan Chinese want to adopt a Sanskrit word for a dish that was invented by them? The technology of "laksa beras" or fresh homemade noodle may come from the Indians. This can be seen from the making of "putu mayam". But this is merely my guess work. But 'putu mayam is a dessert and not a savoury dish. Since Italian spaghetti and laksa are both savouries and we can see the Middle Eastern connection now, it is not at all impossible that laksa was brought by the Persian traders to this region several centuries ago.

While I was in Iran early this year, the Iranians, who are the modern Persians love a stew dish made from noodles, tomato soup, lemon juice and dill. Tomato soup might be an addition after Colombo found the Americas but dill and noodles definitely remind me a lot of laksa. This stew might have been originated hundred of years ago.

I hope the original writer of the article do make some study on Malays' Asam Pedas. In fact I would suggest her or him to have an in-depth study of Indonesian food as well. If one study the South East Asian food, the South East Asians be it the Malays, the Indonesians, the Thais or the Burmese love to add aromatic herbs in their cuisine. The Thais love the kaffir lime leaves, the lemonstalk and the galangal. The Minangkabaus of Sumatera love the ruku-ruku (tropical basil)and the turmeric leaves. The Javanese love the daum salam (Indonesian bay leaves or in Malay, daun samak) and the Menados of the Sulawesi loves daun kemangi (tropical basil).

In Malaysia and Singapore, laksa definitely comes from the Malays. If the original writer wants to write an article dedicated to Peranakan laksa, she (or he) may do so. But please do not sideline the Malays' contribution in the evolution of laksa in Malaysia and Singapore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adrinaomar (talk • contribs) 16:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

If laksa is malay in origin, why have I never come across malay vendors selling laksa? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.119.127.30 (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Laksa Outside Southeast Asia

I understand due to then high number of overseas students and migrants from Singapore and Malaysia, laksa is universally available in urban Australia, even in many non-Asian establishments like Bill Granger's restaurants in Sydney, but its availability is confined to Malaysian noodle houses across the Tasman in New Zealand, and in the US it is still virtually unknown. Should this be added into the main article? --JNZ (talk) 00:30, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Main Picture

Whose idea was it to put a bowl of rice noodles topped with what looked like turd swimming in some dull, unappetizing soup and dared to call it LAKSA?! Please somebody change it with something better. It makes me sick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.170.94.90 (talk) 11:35, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Types of laksa

The 'types of laksa' section claims there are 2 types of laksa, then the rest of the article goes on to describe at least 3 or 4. This needs to be reconciled. Ashmoo (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

What it's trying to say (I cleaned it up a bit) is that laksas can be categorized as either curry-type (coconut/curry/sweet) or assam-type (fish/tamarind/sour), and then there are a couple of oddball laksas that mix together features of the two. Somebody has given Sarawak laksa (one of the oddballs) its own column in the table, but I'm not sure this is necessary or representative. Jpatokal (talk) 03:36, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Slaksa.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Slaksa.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

I have an idea wandering around in my head that laksa is a word from the very extreme north of Europe!?≈≈≈

What an interesting article! 13:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soup jennay (talk • contribs)

RFC: Origin of Laksa

The claim that Laksa originated only from Malaysia can be traced back to the September 21, 2009 claim by then Malaysian Minister of Tourism Ng Yen Yen's attempt to brand those foods as of Malaysian origin. The most recent update to the issue was the public statement on September 23, 2009 that the minister claimed that she wanted to do a study to verify that claim, but up to the point that she stepped down from her post in 2013, that study still has not been made, or at least the results were not published[2]. Recently an editor has been pushing Ng's claim by removing other countries [3] and reverting information/context about the case [4], even claiming that no relevant source had been provided to show that there Malaysia is not the sole claimant of origin for the dish. [5]. Hope to get more eyes on this. Zhanzhao (talk) 06:34, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

161.139.222.17, Magbantay, I have added additional references that show that there are conflicting claims of origin for the dish, with credentials no less credible than the source of the single-origin claim. [6][7][8] Again, I request that we discuss this in talk and not just delete well referenced information. The best way to fix this is to list all countries in the info box, then elaborate and break down the individual claims in the body of the article. But if you guys keep just reverting its not helping at all. Zhanzhao (talk) 23:30, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Update: I have added a new section which includes all the different origin claims, all of which have references provided. Please participate by discussing. Zhanzhao (talk) 09:04, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

It seems to me that there are a great many claims made, which merit inclusion as claims; but there are no reliable sources for exactly when and where this dish first appeared. Under these circumstances it's very disruptive to have editors reverting to get their nationally preferred version of what is "correct" in the infobox. Some day I might concoct a banquet of 'dishes of disputed origin', such as laksa, hummus, krainerwurst, chicken tikka masala, and pavlova. William Avery (talk) 11:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. I really don't know how to proceed though. Any suggestions? I have started this discussion here and added info and sources that clearly explained the different claims, they don't seem to have even bothered to check what was being added and just blindly reverting everything, assuming their one source somehow trumps everything else thats being added.Zhanzhao (talk) 11:49, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

I think it is safe to assume that Laksa is a Peranakan Cuisine (Chinese immigrant-native Malay/Bumiputera or Pribumi intermarriage). The Peranakan culture can be found most significantly in this cities: Penang, Malacca, Singapore, Medan, Batavia (Jakarta), Tangerang, Bogor, Semarang and Surabaya. These cities are today separated between three countries namely Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia. Sure Indonesia have our own of laksa recipes, nevertheless after visiting all of these countries, I think laksa is somewhat more prevalent in Malaysia and Singapore. Those two countries are actually united prior to 1965. Laksa is more likely fought between Malaysia and Singapore, while Indonesia seems to satisfied with our soto. Every culture seems to have their own flavoursome soup recipe as their "national dish". This role is played by laksa for Malaysia and Singapore, while laksa popularity seems to be overshadowed by soto in Indonesia, which has become somewhat our "national soup". The laksa origin is unclear, but probably it was in Penang, Malacca or Singapore, and quickly spread to Medan and Batavia. Until there is a study and well referenced source, the contradicting claims and source is not helping. I think Laksa is clearly Malaysian, but Singapore is so close and have thriving Peranakan culture too. It is safe to said that laksa is shared between Malaysia and Singapore, and to lesser extent Indonesia. Gunkarta  talk  13:59, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

I think it is clear by reference Laksa came from Malaysia. References that have provided are from a reliable source. Officially, Laksa has been gazetting or certification as a Malaysian heritage food by the Malaysian Department of National Heritage under ‘Act 645 (National Heritage Act 2005)’. Also, just like Malaysian Tourism Dr Ng said (2009), “we will identify certain key dishes (to declare as Malaysian);Laksa. However, since today, no official claim from other countries. It is just only war of words among the citizens. If something is not right, there should be officially protests against this statement. There are many varieties of laksa in Malaysia, and almost every state has their own version of laksa. It’s show how unique and important to the nation. Singapore only has a version of Laksa. Only in 2014, recorded about 13.9 million Singapore tourists visited Malaysia (channelnewsasia,2014). From this number, it is possible outflow of food from Malaysia to Singapore have occurred. Based on Asian Coresspondat, writed by Lara Dunston,” Although laksa can also be found in Indonesia and Singapore, it is Malaysian in origin and Malaysia remains the best place to try it in its many forms. The most common theory for the origins of the name ‘laksa’ is that it comes from the Persian word for noodle, ‘laksha’. How noodles ended up in Malaysia is not codified, however, Chinese immigrants did bring noodles to Melaka, which may go some way to explain the Penang connection and the origins of this complex dish”. Here, It was clear that globally recognized that Laksa is from Malaysia.161.139.222.17 (talk) 11:29, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Laksa originated in Malaysian. Historically, Singapore also from Malaysia! So how come if Singaporean said Laksa to be coming from them while they only have one version of Laksa. Let's think for a moment. For example, in the event of a split state in Malaysia once again happen. For examples Johor split out from Malaysia and Johor has one of Laksa version, namely Laksa Johor. Do Johor will participate claim Laksa as originating from Johor while it is only has one version ? . As this case, Singapore is only has a version of Laksa, Laksa Katong while Malaysia have Laksa in the entire of country! In this case, seems like Indonesian more mature. Not claiming what is not from them. Well done. Suppose one day I eat Laksa. As a chef, I derived version of Laksa from Malaysia into Philippines version and name it as Philippines Laksa. So does the Philippines can participate to claim which is Laksa came from Philippines? Think about it my friends. For that answer, ‘Yes, we can’. But only Philippines Laksa not the whole name of Laksa. I’m a sous chef in the Philippines. Naturally I am very interested in the food and working with food. In my personal view, Laksa is absolutely always associated with Malaysia as the sushi with Japan, Singapore with Chili crab, and Satay associated with Indonesia. In this case, I’m interested with the opinion that given by a neutral party, Lara Dunston. As we know, Lara Dunston very famous all over the world on assignment for publications from National Geographic Traveller in the USA to The Independent in the UK. For me, Lara Dunston statement is acceptable and neutral, because she either not from Malaysia, Singapore or Indonesia. As she, my personal opinion as a chef in Phillipines also agreed that Laksa is from Malaysia. I would not object if the Singapore said Katong Laksa came from Singapore, but for Laksa, I prefer Malaysia. One more thing, I very unsatisfied when Singaporean also said Soto or Soto mie also from Singapore. Examples, soto mie page:(cur | prev) 06:22, 12 January 2016‎ Zhanzhao (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (4,725 bytes) (+229)‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit by 161.139.222.17 (talk) to last revision by Lee788. (TW)) (undo | thank) and (cur | prev) 07:53, 12 January 2016‎ Lee788 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,725 bytes) (-9)‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit by (talk) to last revision by Zhanzhao.) (undo | thank). Both of you please stop making troubles. Next, do not claim Satay also from Singapore. Please stop all the nonsense. Magbantay (talk) 3:30, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

It is not 'safe to assume' anything. Reliable sources are required, which will be based on research into the matter. For instance, in the case of brown Windsor soup the dish is documented on menus at various dates. All that has been provided here so far are Chauvinistic statements by journalists. The article can also document relevant statements by ministers, but the actual matter of origin is not settled by ministerial fiat. William Avery (talk) 17:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Look at above, my friend from Malaysia proposed a number of references including a statement from their minister and Laksa also already recognized as their heritage food. I'm also agreed with Lara Dunston statement that published in Asian Correspondent. For me, it very trustworthy (Lara Dunston and Asian Correspondent). Please see the soto mie page:(cur | prev) 06:22, 12 January 2016‎ Zhanzhao (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (4,725 bytes) (+229)‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit by 161.139.222.17 (talk) to last revision by Lee788. (TW)) (undo | thank) and (cur | prev) 07:53, 12 January 2016‎ Lee788 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,725 bytes) (-9)‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit by (talk) to last revision by Zhanzhao.). From here, seems like Zhanzhao and Lee788 shows them are not very good editor. Are these people we want to believe it? Me, absolutely,no!. Make claim seems like all foods in Southeast Asia originated in Singapore. For me, it vandalism. Magbantay (talk) 3:50, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for participating in the talk page. Hope this gets resolved before the page protection expires. To address 4 points.

• The Tourism Minister did initially claim Laksa, as well as a few other food belonged to Malaysia according to a September 19 2009 report. She later backtracked and said a study would be conducted to back up her claim per a report dated Sep 23. To date, 5+ years later, no such study has been made (or at least revealed). I mentioned these points in the article (which referenced news agencies as sources), but Magbantay and 161.139.222.17 kept removing it.
• Even though the Asian Correspondent source claimed the dish to be of Malaysian origin, the Jakarta Post source claims it is of Indonesian origin. Regardless of what we think and believe, Wikipedia ultimately functions via Verifiability, not truth. Its not what we think or feel (even our personal preference about the sources), but what the sources say, and their reliability. And what I see here are multiple claims by no less reliable sources. Unless you wish to argue that The Jakarta Post is not a reliable source, I am fine with moving the discussion of the various sources to WP:RSN.
• I jumped the gun on Mie Soto page. But I later rectified it by providing a source that did show the dish having originated from Indonesia to the discussion[9], which was later used and acknowledged by Gunkarta [10].
• I don't know why you brought up Satay(which I do not recall editing) or Lee788, but it seems you guys have some history of food edit-warring with him - He's not involved here, would not suggesting involving him as there are already too many chefs in the kitchen (Pardon the poor pun). Personally, I'm not hardup about Singapore being in the infobox - out of the sources provided, the Singapore source is the weakest. Zhanzhao (talk) 22:26, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

161.139.222.17, Magbantay, despite comments by uninvolved editors Gunkarta and William Avery, this still seems to be getting no where. I would like to move this to either the Third Opinion Board or the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard, and let other uninvolved editors have a look at this. Regardless the result there, can we agree to abide by it? Zhanzhao (talk) 00:47, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Again, you show bad ethics in editing. Your statement, ' despite comments by uninvolved editors Gunkarta and William Avery, this still seems to be getting no where', you make mistakes again. Gunkarta involved as editors in this article. Zhanzhao, your statement is unacceptable. Since early, it's show that you are too greedy and 'jumped the gun' without reference and sensitivity. See Revision as of 13:21, 10 November 2015 (view source) Zhanzhao (talk | contribs). Here you have changed from Malaysia origin to originated in Singapore. Question is, Do you always editing the article with 'jumped the gun'?? If correct, this is a serious case. Because your attitude will affect the reliability Wikipedia towards public. 161.139.222.17 (talk) 15:31, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

When I say uninvolved, I meant the current edit-war thats ongoing. He has not been involved in reverting either you or I. Sorry I was not clear enough. And you failed to mention that the November 10 edit I made was actually a revert, where my edit-summary clearly stated "unreferenced change of content", because the editor made a non-minor change without providing a reference. In any case, its clear that you're still unrelenting on your stance in this issue, so I'll raise this to DRN instead. Zhanzhao (talk) 08:13, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Just what i said, you always 'jumped the gun' in editing. Please make a study before editing. After studied your references, the statements from Professor Penny Van Esterik,Southeast Asia had an early period of intense interaction with China and India, which largely influenced the culture of the region, and therefore its cuisine. According to Professor Penny Van Esterik in Food Culture in Southeast Asia, Indian traders arrived in Southeast Asia as early as 200 BC, while the Chinese had settlements in Indonesia by the 16th century. The descendants of these Chinese traders were called the Peranakans, and the tradition of laksa was born out of the Peranakan desire to marry Chinese food with existing Southeast Asian flavors like coconut milk, and those brought over by South Asian traders, like chillies. Often, the desire to marry cuisines resulted from literal marriages between Peranakans and locals. In Indonesia, for example, the origin story of laksa traces back to the Chinese coastal settlements. Chinese sailors set out to find local wives, and these women began incorporating chilli peppers and coconut milk into Chinese noodle soup. Similarly, the arrival of laksa in Malaysia can be traced back to marriages of Chinese traders to local women in Malacca in the early 19th century. I realize what the mistake from this statements. From your statement, Professor Penny Van Esterik said, Chinese had settlements in Indonesia by the 16th century, and the arrival of laksa in Malaysia can be traced back to marriages of Chinese traders to local women in Malacca in the early 19th century. There is the question from here the arrival of laksa in Malaysia can be traced back to marriages of Chinese traders to local women in Malacca in the early 19th century? However, based on historical records, the first wave of Han Chinese settlers came during the Malacca Empire in the early 15th century. The friendly diplomatic relations between China and Malacca culminated during the reign of Sultan Mansur Syah, who married the Chinese princess Hang Li Po. A senior minister of state and five hundred youths and maids of noble birth accompanied the princess to Malacca. Admiral Zheng He had also brought along 100 bachelors to Malacca. Even, when his fleet first arrived in Malacca early 15th century, there was already a sizable Chinese community. The General Survey of the Ocean Shores (瀛涯勝覽, Yíngyá Shènglǎn) composed by the translator Ma Huan in 1416 gave very detailed accounts of his observations of people's customs and lives in the ports they visited. In addition, based on Derek Heng (2009), by the seventh century, the term kunlun refer specifically to coastal people of the Malay region. By the ninth century, in Yiqiejing yingyi (815), Hui-Lin note that kunlun bo (Malay ship) were arriving regularly at Gulf of Tonkin and along south eastern Chinese coast. In the 15th century, some small city-states of the Malay Peninsula often paid tribute to various kingdoms such as those of China and Siam. From here, we can see how long the history of Chinese settlement in Malacca and it's not just began in the early of 19th century. The descendants of these two groups of people, mostly from Fujian province, are called the Baba (men) and Nyonya (women). Their descendants moved to Penang and Singapore during British rule. Historically, laksa arrived in the town of Katong when the Peranakans travelled down to the island from the Malaysian peninsula. As before, I still stand by that Laksa is from Malaysia. Refer to Oxford dictionary, definition of laksa in English, A Malaysian dish of Chinese origin, consisting of rice noodles served in a curry sauce or hot soup. 161.139.222.17 (talk) 16:19, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

By the Oxford definition, the phrasing of "Malaysian Dish of Chinese Origin" explicitly dictates that China has to be included as well. But i digress. Frankly speaking, I'm not too concerned with Singapore being in the infobox. But removing Indonesia as well and just leaving Malaysia inside is questionable. Malaysia does not have a monopoly on South East Asian dishes. Even though Malaysia's ex-tourism minister would want us to believe that when she made that statement back in 2009. She claimed a study would be conducted to prove her claims, its been 5+ years and she already stepped down and there's still no word on the study (this part was being removed as well). And I question the rationale for removing the writeup and sources which had been provided in the "Origin" section that gives information of the Indonesian origins. Deleting the writeup from wikipedia does not change the fact that more than one country, not just Malaysia, lays claim to this dish. Zhanzhao (talk) 10:55, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Your words,I'm not too concerned with Singapore being in the infobox. Please stop all fraud and farce. If yes, why from the beginning see Revision as of 13:21, 10 November 2015 (view source) Zhanzhao (talk | contribs) you have changed from Malaysia origin to originated in Singapore. Are you not too concerned with Singapore being in the infobox? I see Indonesian was not interested in this war. Sometimes, when you explain more,show that who you are exactly. This is public knowledge, so please concern about sensitivity and readability of editing. At least, make a study before editing. You repeat that our ex-minister want to do research, how about you minister, any research? Even, no single word deny the statements from our minister. Only Malaysia officially move a step. After our Minister declared Laksa originated in Malaysia. Laksa has been gazetting or certification as a Malaysian heritage food by the Malaysian Department of National Heritage under ‘Act 645 (National Heritage Act 2005)’. So, any declaration from Singapore and Indonesia? Only studies that could dispute the validity. Referring to the oxford definition, 'Malaysian Dish' neither Singapore dish nor Indonesian dish. It was clear. 161.139.222.17 (talk) 19:19, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

As mentioned already, the only reason I made the Nov 10 change was because it appeared to be a substantial change of content without a source being provided. This is very clear from the edit summary. If you insist on the Oxford Dictionary being definitive, the infobox would have to be changed to "China, Indonesia, Malaysia". I doubt thats what you want. In any case, the last word on the matter by the minister was this: [[11]]"Dr Ng said a study on the origins of foods in the country would be conducted and an apology conveyed if it was wrongly claimed." As far as I know, no such study has been conducted, or the results revealed. Feel free to correct me on this. Else, the only verifiable thing that happened was that a minister claiming something, promising to do a research to show evidence of the claim, and never followed up on it. And this claim should be attributed as such.

FYI The same minister also claimed that Hainanese Chicken Rice belongs to and originated in Malaysia[[12]]. Not the Hainanese. Go figure.... Zhanzhao (talk) 11:49, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

And Magbantay mentioned the "Malaysian Department of National Heritage under ‘Act 645 (National Heritage Act 2005)" as a source. FYI Satay was also gazetting or certification as a Malaysian heritage food. [[13]]. And laddu. And mooncake. And Tosai. These are just the more obvious ones. All these are historically and easily traced to its native Indonesia/China/India roots, yet appear on this same list. Just because its on Malaysia's heritage list does not mean they are created in Malaysia Zhanzhao (talk) 12:08, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Clearly, you not understand what the meaning phrasing of "Malaysian Dish of Chinese Origin". Let me explains for you, words Malaysia dish, refer to foods or cuisine that's from Malaysia. Chinese origin, means, from Chinese people. Chinese refer to 'people' not country of China. Full meaning of phrase is 'Chinese Malaysian cuisine, which consists of rice or curry sauce served in hot soup'. Also, we already know that Laksa is a combination of Chinese and Malay cuisine, but dominated by Chinese in part of noodle not the whole ingredients. So,how come it also from China? We, Malaysia, not declared Hainanese Chicken Rice as Malaysia origin. Only Nasi Ayam has been declared as Malaysian food.161.139.222.17 (talk) 20:19, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

The Malaysian Tourism Minister made that claim.[[14]] So either she was wrong, or CNN. Take your pick.Zhanzhao (talk) 12:32, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Dear my compatriot, I think enough is enough. Ignore immature Malaysian, Philippines and Indonesia on this page. If they want claim it as their owned, let it go. Let's create our owned, Katong Laksa. Importantly, it is sure belongs to us. Leave it to them. No point if you still fight with them. Lee788 (talk) 12:40, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Lee, please refrain from personal attacks on Wikipedia. In any case, at this moment I am not interested in creating a new article by myself. Not sure if its significant enought to stand on its own in any case. However, if you wish to do so I can provide assistance i.e. source and references.

Update- just realized that Katong Laksa already has its own page. Zhanzhao (talk) 22:35, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry my friend,Zhanzhao. I have to reverted edit. Reference from The Jakarta Post one still not verified. There are still many questions that need to be investigated. Especially relating to the history. Before, I explained to you in my statements along with references. I hope you can understand, my friend. Also, based on our friend from Indonesia, Gunkarta said, Laksa is more likely fought between Malaysia and Singapore, while Indonesia seems to satisfied with our soto. From here, he's from Indonesia said it's between Malaysia and Singapore. However, just what i said before, historically, laksa arrived in the town of Katong when the Peranakans travelled down to the island from the Malaysian peninsula. It was proof by previous study, Baba and Nyonya descendants moved from Malacca to Penang and Singapore during British rule. My suggestion is, from the current references, it safe to write Laksa from Malaysia. Later, if you have valid references that's can support your statement, we edit it again. I'm very open. Here, I would like to extend my hand in friendship. 161.139.222.17 (talk) 22:19, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

No hard feelings, but that line of reasoning is not exactly exceptable. The source from The Jakarta Post is actually quoting Myra Sidharta, an active scholar[15] who is known for her knowledge of Indonesian history with a specialization in Peranakan culture [16]. This is not some nobody they grabbed off the street, but someone who is speaking in her area of expertise. PS: The source merely states the spread of the Chinese population down the Melaka straits, not when Laksa originated. Whereas the Jakarta post article is very explicit in discussing the very specific Laksa dish. Gunkarta was expressing his personal opinion on the matter without going into any wikipedia guidelines, but even then he said that it should be split between Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore (weightage between the 3 is another matter). Zhanzhao (talk) 00:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

• Don't think this is at the point it needs an RFC, but I agree with the current version: mention each claim without promoting any of them. That is required by WP:NPOV, and it is common for foods which have unclear or disputed origins (viz. potato chip, French fries). When we add in the bad blood between Malaysia and Indonesia over the past half century...

But yes, anyone deleting sourced competing claims is, IMHO, committing an act of vandalism, and should be reverted. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:23, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

• And as a note: I've protected the page for a week so that discussion can continue without any further edit warring. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

• In this case I have to agree with Chris Woodrich and Zhanzhao. WP:NPOV is required and all references of competing claims should be well presented without any censorship, so the Jakarta Post's and National Library Board's articles stays. Agreed with current protected version. Since there is some confusion on my previous statements, let me rephrase it again. So far, despite sympathizing and understanding Malaysian argument of origin, I've rather reluctantly endorse the "nationality" of the food, and mention the obvious fact: Laksa is obviously a Peranakan dish, and the Peranakan culture exist in three countries: Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia. The question of origin is obscure, and I honestly do not know. I've expressed my personal opinion based on my past visit to those countries, that compared to Indonesia, indeed laksa is more prevalent in Malaysia, and also to a slight lesser extent; Singapore. In Malaysia laksa and nasi lemak are offered everywhere, while in Indonesia soto, sate and nasi goreng do. In Singapore, laksa is also popular, but it seems bak kut teh and nasi ayam hainan are more Singaporean. So, in sympathy I think; Malaysians sentiments for laksa is probably the same as how Indonesians feels to soto. I do think it is more likely that laksa fight was contested between Malaysia and Singapore, based on past Malaysian minister claim, that was a reaction triggered by Singaporean promotion on laksa. While so far, Indonesian officials seems to do nothing to add on their claim, except on tracing their laksa to coastal Chinese settlements as mentioned in the Jakarta Post article. Gunkarta  talk  02:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

I was asked by the feedback request service to comment on this, but it's turning into an unfollowable debate for someone who's not familiar with the subject matter, and frankly, it doesn't look like an rfc is really appropriate here with all the conflicting sources. I would say the current version of the article, explaining the conflicting information, is appropriate. Lynn (SLW) (talk) 14:18, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

@LynnWysong:, @Crisco 1492: After a few seasons of "peace", the arguement is back again. I've requested the editor discuss this at the talk page on his page[17] and on the edit summary[18] but this is continuing. Last time, a page protection was effective in stopping the disruptive editing and getting a discussion going here [19], so a new page protection should help again. Thanks! Zhanzhao (talk) 03:51, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Removed the etymology section

I don't feel too strongly, but the section did not seem all that notable. Also, I removed the qualifier in the lead about Peranakan cuisine; either add other cuisines it's a part of, or don't have a possibly misleading definite of Peranakan cuisine, since one can just click on that link to see the description. ʙʌsʌwʌʟʌ ^тʌʟк 19:56, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Laksa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100417141629/http://www.tourism.terengganu.gov.my/culinary/laksam.htm to http://www.tourism.terengganu.gov.my/culinary/laksam.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060620223925/http://www.tourismpenang.gov.my/article.cfm?id=43 to http://www.tourismpenang.gov.my/article.cfm?id=43
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060618013613/http://www.sarawak.com.my/travel_features/guide/laksa.html to http://www.sarawak.com.my/travel_features/guide/laksa.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:04, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Laksa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://asiancorrespondent.com/91144/laksa-discovering-malaysias-signature-dish.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131128004711/http://www.tabloidnova.com/Nova/Sedap/Makanan/Laksa-Cibinong-Jawa-Barat/ to http://www.tabloidnova.com/Nova/Sedap/Makanan/Laksa-Cibinong-Jawa-Barat/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:29, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - RPM SP 2022 - MASY1-GC 1260 200 Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 February 2022 and 5 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Alitea10101 (article contribs).