Talk:Baklava

Suggested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was not moved. This is a non-starter for the reasons discussed and per the consensus below.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:25, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Baklava → Turkish baklava In 19 December 2013 Baklava became the first ever Turkish product registered list of Protected Geographical Indication by the European Commission. Name of Antep Baklava or Gaziantep Baklava just used as local name in Gaziantep, it's recognized as Turkish Baklava from outside like Turkish delight. Baklava should move to Turkish baklava above-mentioned reasons. Maurice07 (talk) 23:12, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.


 * Support, as proposer. Maurice07 (talk) 23:33, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose I've never once heard the name "Turkish baklava" and the links provided don't change my mind.  Hot Stop   23:47, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose - nationalist baker protests notwithstanding, the article lists regional variations throughout the Ottoman empire and "Lebanese baklava" "Greek baklava" are as much subtypes of the umbrella "baklava" as the Turkish type. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:44, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose - the generic name is baklava. Nobody goes to a sweet shop to ask for Turkish baklava, just baklava. If Turkish baklava has specific qualities, these can be expanded in a "Turkish baklava" section within baklava article. werldwayd (talk) 02:48, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose - the topic of the article is baklava in general, not Turkish baklava in particular. The original poster seems to be misinterpreting the EU registration of a PGI. What that registration says is that the name "Antep baklava" officially refers to baklava produced in a certain way in a certain place from certain ingredients. What it does not say is that Antep baklava is the standard for baklava. Nothing excludes the possibility of an additional PGI for, say, Aleppo baklava or Bursa baklava. --Macrakis (talk) 06:20, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose Maurice07, how do you justify this in light of our policy at WP:COMMONNAME? It should simply be Baklava, which is how it is normally known. Dougweller (talk) 10:41, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose ridiculous nationalism -- Ե րևանցի talk  21:36, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:
 * I am unsure how to format my comment so apologies if this breaks the page. I am confused why the article has a description box saying the place of origin was the Ottoman Empire where as the article text explains the origin of Baklava is from Assyria. Can someone explain or fix this discrepancy? I do not have an account to do so since the article is locked — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.176.117.241 (talk) 18:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Comment - User:Yerevantsi, I'm looking your contribs so far and I don't need to take lessons from you on nationalism. Completely article related Armenia and Armenians. Best regards.. Maurice07 (talk) 20:03, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * OK. Nice to know you can't see my edits unrelated to Armenia. -- Ե րևանցի talk  22:10, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Origins of Baklava

 * I am unsure how to format my comment so apologies if this breaks the page. I am confused why the article has a description box saying the place of origin was the Ottoman Empire where as the article text explains the origin of Baklava is from Assyria. Can someone explain or fix this discrepancy? I do not have an account to do so since the article is locked  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.176.117.241 (talk) 20:19, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

It is my opinion that the "history" of this food need to be revised. The opening sentence is rather misleading: "there is evidence that its current form was developed in the imperial kitchens of the Topkapı Palace in Istanbul."

The above quote accounts for its "current form" but doesn't account for its actual 'origins' and is thus, extremely misleading. The Assyrians have a historical claim to the actual, 'original' food as do the Byzantines and subsequently the ancient Greeks.

It is highly misleading to suggest that it was the invading Ottomans who only in the latter half of the 2nd millennium CE started serving this food; who pioneered it.

There needs to be further discussion regarding the 'origins' and not just the modern form. The talk about "layered breads" is irrelevant and somewhat of a red herring, given that it is in the 'origin' section. The line about the Sultan serving baklava in the history section further demonstrates that which I am describing. It does not explain the origin but is explicitly circumstantial though it is used as evidence to support an origin argument. The 'origin' is important and it deserves more than one sentence at the start of that section. The Ottomans pioneered it, yes; but where did it originate.

Taking Perry's word - a single source - for this is not effective information propagation. I have noticed that Perry has been used on all of the relating pages such as the Filo page as well, as though Filo just appeared suddenly when in fact it is a Greek word meaning "thin;" as in 'thin pastry.'

This sentence further illustrates what I am talking about: "The thin phyllo dough used today was probably developed in the kitchens of the Topkapı Palace." --- This needs a citation and does not have one as it is very important. You can not just make things up and pass them off as fact to suit a circular argument; in this case proving that Filo is of Turkic origins. "Probably," is not encyclopedic.

This topic needs further discussion and research. ONE source to cover the entire page's origin section is certainly, not enough. - Eidetic Man (talk) 14:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't think anyone knows for sure where phyllo dough was invented. We probably need to find several sources that meet WP:RS and attribute statements to the authors. I wouldn't normally do this, but I'm copying an old section from the archives below: Dougweller (talk) 15:16, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

2007 discussion on credible sources
The quality of the sources used in the baklava article has often been discussed, so I thought I'd write down some thoughts on the subject....

The Wikipedia policies WP:No original research and WP:Verifiability require that we use WP:Reliable sources in articles (I'd strongly recommend editors read those policies carefully).

As with many subjects, this can be a challenge for food history. There are many legends about food history (see, e.g. Croissant), and a lot of national pride attached to many foods. The legends tend to be perpetuated in cookbooks, newspaper columns, Web pages, and other non-scholarly sources. Fortunately, for some foods at least, there are serious researchers who have looked into the history using good methods and sources and have published their results in reputable books and journals. Of course, this doesn't necessarily mean that their conclusions are correct or definitive, but it gives some degree of confidence. And if there are contradictory scholarly theories, WP policy says we report them.

The current baklava article contains all the scholarly theories that editors have found so far and reports on their conclusions. Some editors have wondered why we should consider Perry as credible. Well, he's a scholar who has studied at Princeton and Berkeley; he has published a translation of al-Baghdadi's cookbook; he reads many of the relevant languages (Arabic, Turkish, Greek). He publishes his work in reputable places, like Petits Propos Culinaires, the Oxford Symposium on Food & Cookery History, the Oxford Companion to Food, and books edited by serious academics (like the one in question). He makes cogent arguments based on direct study of the documents in question. He references relevant secondary literature, even when it disagrees with him (like Vryonis and Koukoules, whom Vryonis references). Because he publishes in reputable places, he opens himself up to criticism, which means that there is an opportunity for rebuttal. His article on baklava is well-reasoned. He doesn't have any (obvious) axe to grind or conflict of interest (e.g. he is not working for the Uzbek Ministry of Culture). He is cited by other articles on the subject. (e.g. "The Westernization of Iranian Culinary Culture", Iranian Studies 36:1:43)

Of course, if any of us find other solid sources, we should integrate them into the article. --Macrakis 20:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I think there misunderstanding of the origin of baklava. Baklava making was first invented in the middle east where the Levant, Mesopotamian and Arabia. Baklava perhaps was introduced to Turkish by Arabs. Just like kunafa, lokum, halva, halawa, Kadayif and many other desserts, with keeping in consideration that the mentioned desserts contain Arabic origin names and not related to the Turkish language or origin. (unsigned comment by User:86.132.195.97 2007-01-07T06:02:52)

This is the baklava article; the other foods you mention have their own history sections. If you have reliable sources for a Middle Eastern origin for baklava, please contribute them. Thanks. --Macrakis 21:46, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter this article shouldn't state Turkic origin is the only possibility Perry is not the only scholar in the world who is reliable therefore changing it is necessary. Vryonis Speros who states that baklava has Greek origins. Vryonis is a Byzantine Professor who can read Ottoman Turkish and Medieval Greek. Source: The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamization from the Eleventh Through the Fifteenth Century by Vryonis Speros Jr. also there is an excerpt taken from Delights from the Garden of Eden: A Cookbook and a History of the Iraqi Cuisine written by Nawal Nasrallah. As far as I have been able to ascertain, Nasrallah is not a serious academic, however, his ideas are interesting. It should also be noted that Perry has read and translated al-Baghdadi, which Nasrallah uses as a source. Nareklm  07:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

LMAO, Narek, copy pasting what I said from Myspace tsk tsk tsk :P :P :P HAHAHAH
 * Yeah man we need all the help we can get ;-) Nareklm  19:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Of course Perry is not the only reliable scholar. Vryonis is already cited in the article for exactly the work you mention. Buell is also mentioned. I don't know anything about Nasrallah's book, but if she has solid research to present, why don't you discuss it here? --Macrakis 19:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2023
•The dessert "Baklavas" has it's origins from the Mediterranean ,where it was firstly made.In the now time baklava is a greek traditional dessert, that's widely spread across the Balcans (Turkey , Albania etc.) 2A02:587:7615:B000:AD7F:46EC:E49B:8D96 (talk) 12:21, 30 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Please replace "The pre-Ottoman origin of the dish is unknown, but, in modern times, it is a common dessert of Turkish, Iranian and Arab cuisines, and other countries of the Levant and Maghreb, along with the South Caucasus, Balkans, Somalia and Central Asia." with the text that I have submitted above
 * . And replace "Place of origin:O
 * Ottoman Emp" with "Place of Origin: Mediterranean"ire
 * Ottoman Empire
 * Ottoman Empi" re 2A02:587:7615:B000:AD7F:46EC:E49B:8D96 (talk) 12:28, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  14:55, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

I want my changes to stay
The reason @TU-nor gave is that its far too detailed, but he could just have reformulated the sentence instead of teverting it as a whole and the Azerbaijani Baklava side is far more detailed than what I wrote, there is a whole cooking recipe with temperatures and all in the Azerbaijani Baklava part, while mine are way more simplistic and shorter formulated. So there is too detailed content in this page, but it are not my additions, I can reword my edits If you want. 93.200.105.234 (talk) 09:16, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * When I said 'far too detailed', I was specifically talking about the lede (the introduction before the first subtitle). The lede of a Wikipedia article is supposed to present – in a succint form – the most important main points about the topic. Detailed discussions should be made further down in the body of the article. In this case the lede just mentions that the origin is 'unknown' (perhaps 'unclear' would be a better choice), and more details are given in the section 'History'. Your suggested addition actually says the same thing three times: 'the pre-Ottoman origin of the dish has many proposals', 'there are a few dishes that could be called the pre-Ottoman origin' and 'there is no consensus on which ... is the pre-Ottoman origin'. That is far too detailed.
 * As for your other changes, my comment was that the additions in several cases was redundant, that is repeating things that already are in the text. In the introduction to the section 'Regional variations', you added and expanded on some items from the text just below, so that the same thing is said in the introducion and in a slightly different way in the 'national' subsection. I have to admit that there already was some unnecessary repetitions of the same kind in that section, but it does certainly not help to add more redundancy. My suggestion would be to reduce the introduction to just mentioning a couple of regional variations and instead expand the subsections.
 * Since your edits contained so many changes at the same time, I may have been a bit rash with my wholesale revert. Some of your suggestions are certainly well worth considering. I will have a stab at it, but I will not reinsert your changes to the lede or expand the introduction to the section 'Regional variations'. If you want to go forward with them, I suggest that you make your specific proposals in new (separate) sections here in the talk page. Regards! --T*U (talk) 11:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Regional Variations part
Why do we need a introduction about what regional variations exist If we can get the exact same info by reading the section of each of these regional variations? I think there shouldnt be a introduction, It is just repeating some info that is already stated in the individual sections of the countrys. Also, the Azerbaijani style baklava section is far too detailedx it should be as simplistic as the other ones. Its kinda Peacock.. 2003:EA:4F4F:CFC7:DA1:BDD5:6C9D:3113 (talk) 02:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree with you about the intro (and have already reduced it somewhat). I will try to find time later today to make a simplification. As for the Azerbaijan section, it really is very detailed, but I am not so sure I am the right person for that task, since I am unfamiliar with the Azeri baklava. I will take a look, though. --T*U (talk) 10:41, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Patrick Faas in Placenta Part
Patrick Faas part claims placenta is of Latin origin, I know that we are just quoting him, but it doesnt fit in with any other information presented in this part. Everything else explains how Its of Greek origin and its warliest mention in greek. Cato named them recipes in Greek tradtion accprding to this article, so how can someone claim it being of Latin origin If cato himself names the recipes „Greek Tradition“ and If we got eatlier mentions of placenta? 2003:EA:4F4F:CFA3:B921:8949:80FC:96A1 (talk) 19:30, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Why were my edits reverted?
@Wikaviani why dont u accept my edits? They are all sourced and the structure parts are logical. I also formulated the Placenta part way better and added new sources and context. 2003:EA:4F4F:CFA3:B921:8949:80FC:96A1 (talk) 19:33, 19 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Who exactly is Caroline Meyer E. ? a food historian ? the Washington post is a newspaper, not an expert source about history. Not to mention, a random website (Jungle Jim's) which is all but what we would call a reliable source. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  19:38, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I didnt add the Caroline Meyer E. source, It existed before my edits and removing the junge jims source which I just added to show other sources saying the same which I wont do again you didnt name any other point for reverting my edits. Like one source that has nothing to do with all other edits I added doenst justify the reverting of all of my edits. 2003:EA:4F4F:CFA3:B921:8949:80FC:96A1 (talk) 19:44, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * You added a Greek origin for the placenta cake, that's not covered by any reliable source in the article as far as i can see. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  19:46, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No I didnt. The Homers odyssey part isnt my work. The Greek poem part aboit plakous also isnt my work, I just formulated it differently so things are more clear and more source orientated. 2003:EA:4F4F:CFA3:B921:8949:80FC:96A1 (talk) 19:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The Greek poem stated originally comes from Antiphanes as stated in the reverted and unreverted version of this page and existed before I touched this page. Antiphanes lived in the 5-4th century BC, I put it at nearly the top, because in this article it is the second oldest mention/recipe of placenta/plakous. Its for structure. 2003:EA:4F4F:CFA3:B921:8949:80FC:96A1 (talk) 19:53, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * There was no such thing as "Most claim" a Greek origin, if I'm not mistaken. Besides, I don't get well how your version improved this article. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  19:57, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Then leave th most out and let that part be reverted to the original part or reformulate, but why u revert the parts even though they give a better structure(from oldest to most recent) and have sources(like the edit on the beginning part of this page) 2003:EA:4F4F:CFA3:B921:8949:80FC:96A1 (talk) 19:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Because some edits cannot be undone due to intermediate edits. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  20:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Change lost to many If u want, but there are literially sources stating what I said and why this structure is better, like one of the sources which are also in the unreverted version of this edit: 2003:EA:4F4F:CFA3:B921:8949:80FC:96A1 (talk) 20:03, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Feel free to reinstall the parts of your edits that are well-covered by reliable sources, but please, do not add "sources" like Jungle Jim's. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  20:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you 2003:EA:4F4F:CFA3:B921:8949:80FC:96A1 (talk) 20:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * This means that my structure makes sense and calling catos recipe the earliest detailed recipe make more sense than calling Catos recipe which are in a Greek tradtion according to Cato himself(also literially stated in the part right after catos recipe) than calling it the earliest recipe in general 2003:EA:4F4F:CFA3:B921:8949:80FC:96A1 (talk) 20:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Etymology
In Turkish, the translation of "look at that word" is "Bak lafa". Many Turkish dishes are called as if there are stories behind them. "imam fainted", and "woman's tight" are a couple of examples. Baklava was likely developed in the Ottoman kitchen and the name was distorted by time, turning into baklava. 73.223.0.150 (talk) 19:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Vandalism
In the last couple of years, this article has been heavily vandalised (partly by a currently blocked ip). Important sourced information has been removed, and what is worse, sourced information has been changed. Of the three theories about its development, one has been removed. About the place of origin (which means the place where the dish in the current form has been first attested), there has been a discussion here in archive 4, and consensus is that the place of birth of Baklava are the Topkapi kitchens during the Ottoman Empire. This means that the origin of baklava in the current form is the Ottoman Empire (not unknown, not Turkey, not Greece, not Iran, and so on). If someone has other sourced reliable information which contradict it, the talk page (after having read the discussions in the archive) is the place to bring it. Thanks, Alex2006 (talk) 05:43, 8 May 2024 (UTC)


 * The origin is not the Republic of Turkey, but Ottoman Empire was also called Turkey. Also what's up with this order: " In modern times, it is common in Greek, Iranian, Arab, Turkish, Levantine, and Maghrebi cuisine, as well as in the cuisines of South Caucasus, Balkans, and Central Asia."? This doesn't seem to be alphabetic. Why is Turkish coming after Greek, Iranian, and Arab? Bogazicili (talk) 18:43, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Of course is not alphabetic, why do you think the article was protected? The primary name for the state created by the Ottomans here on wikipedia is Ottoman Empire, so the problem does not arise. Returning to the alphabetical order, since baklava is made from Casablanca to Almaty, I would remove single nations from the lead as far as possible, and mention only the main geographical areas: Middle East, Balkans, Maghreb, Levant, Central Asia. Any addition of specific countries is undue weight, and national variants of the dish can be put in the article body. Alex2006 (talk) 07:58, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * just to be clear, that was a rhetorical question, I was actually criticizing the biased ordering. I agree with your suggestion of just mentioning regions. I'd prefer proper geographic regions though, like West Asia, Southeast Europe, Central Asia, and North Africa. Btw, the article was protected after my request Bogazicili (talk) 20:50, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * "mention only the main geographical areas: Middle East, Balkans, Maghreb, Levant" The Levant is typically considered part of the Middle East. Dimadick (talk) 19:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * thanks for protecting the article! I know, I think the proposed introduction was just a way of introducing cultural regions into the definition and not purely geographical ones: there is a Levantine cuisine and a Middle Eastern cuisine, the Balkans are the cultural analogue of south-eastern Europe, and so on. The main question is: do we want to use geographical regions or not? for me we can use them, but however we decide, I think individual countries should disappear from the introduction, because there are too many of them, and they are a constant source of edit warring. There is room to mention them in the body of the article. Alex2006 (talk) 15:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes we should use geographical regions, but I don't want editors interpretations of "cultural regions". Please stick to proper geographic terms like West Asia. Bogazicili (talk) 16:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
 * OK, I think that you are right. This is the new lead, which restores the stable version, with the geographic regions:

Baklava (/bɑːkləˈvɑː, ˈbɑːkləvɑː/[1] or /bəˈklɑːvə/[2]) is a layered dessert made of filo pastry sheets, filled with chopped nuts, and sweetened with syrup or honey.

It was one of the most popular sweet pastries of Ottoman cuisine.[3]

The pre-Ottoman origin of the dish is unknown, but, in modern times, it is a common dessert in many countries of Western Asia, Southeastern Europe, Central Asia, and North Africa.


 * Let's see if it is ok for everyone. Alex2006 (talk) 06:05, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Agree with this but the last sentence is too fragmented with too many commas. Also it can be more accurate. I'd suggest:
 * "There are several theories for the pre-Ottoman origin of the dish. In modern times, it is a common dessert among cuisines of countries in West Asia, Southeast Europe, Central Asia, and North Africa." Bogazicili (talk) 18:24, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with you, your version is better. Let's wait another day or so to allow other opinions, if there is none I will change the lead accordingly. Thanks! Alex2006 (talk) 09:56, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Actually, a slight change, the pre-Ottoman version are different than modern version I believe: "There are several theories for the origin of pre-Ottoman version of the dish. In modern times, it is a common dessert among cuisines of countries in West Asia, Southeast Europe, Central Asia, and North Africa." Bogazicili (talk) 17:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course: this is what many people don't understand. As origin, one means the first attestation of the dish as we know it now (in case of Baklava, it is Ottoman). Then, we have the pre-dish (modern) history, and this is always nebulous at best. So we have:

Baklava (/bɑːkləˈvɑː, ˈbɑːkləvɑː/[1] or /bəˈklɑːvə/[2]) is a layered dessert made of filo pastry sheets, filled with chopped nuts, and sweetened with syrup or honey.

It was one of the most popular sweet pastries of Ottoman cuisine.[3]

There are several theories for the origin of the pre-Ottoman version of the dish. In modern times, it is a common dessert among cuisines of countries in West Asia, Southeast Europe, Central Asia, and North Africa.


 * Alex2006 (talk) 10:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Balaklava
The article has this note at the top:

I find it hard to believe that there is really any genuine confusion between the two terms. This seems like some sort of joke. I see no discussion in Talk archives. Thoughts? --Macrakis (talk) 21:21, 22 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I've seen restaurant menus make this mistake, but I'm not sure that counts. They are spelled similarly enough in English that someone might mix them up.  -  Sumanuil  .  (talk to me) 21:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Ottoman name
you said that I should bring my issue to the talk page, so what is your problem with removing ottoman language translation? Also, the newly made edit by someone whos name i dont remmeber added origin cathegory, which doesnt at all make sense, since Its origin is debated and no consencus has been reached. 93.199.244.40 (talk) 08:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Sumanuil what would you say? 93.199.244.40 (talk) 09:46, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * "Origin" in a food article denote the first mention of the dish in the known form, not the place where the earliest first ancestor of the dish is attested. For example, origin of pizza is not Middle East, but Naples. Origin of Carbonara, which is also a dish with several theories about its origin, is Rome, since it was first mentioned there. Back to baklava, none of the three main theories about the origin of the dish (Rome/Greece, Central Asia and Iran) mentions the Ottoman Empire, but none of these proposed 'ancestors' resemble modern baklava. They are different dishes, which haven't much to do with today's sweet. What we know for sure, is that the first documented mention of Baklava as we know it is ottoman, as a sweet prepared in Topkapi. So, this is its "origin". If one day researchers will find an earlier mention (for example, in a byzantine cookbook) of baklava in today's form, we will change the "origin" field accordingly, but this would most probably not solve the problem of its ancestor. About the ottoman name, since the dish is ottoman, and the etymology is ottoman, it belongs to the lead. Removing it is disruptive editing. Alex2006 (talk) 10:15, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Wrong. Carbonara and Pizza can definetly be located to Italy, dates on flatbread isnt at all something like pizza. Carbonara also has a Italic origin. Baklava tho, is contested and has many theories on Its origin, the topkapi palace isnt that often seen as its origin. Unlike the examples you brought up, the Ancient Greek and Byzantine Placenta was much like Baklava, as was the older plakous version, Imma cite to you from the text of this article so u can understand:
 * Many claim that the placenta, and therefore likely baklava derived from a recipe from Ancient Greece. Homer's Odyssey, written around 800 BC, mentions thin breads sweetened with walnuts and honey. In the fifth century BC, Philoxenos states in his poem "Dinner" that, in the final drinking course of a meal, hosts would prepare and serve cheesecake made with milk and honey that was baked into a pie.
 * The word "placenta" originally comes from the Greek language plakous (πλακοῦς), which means something "flat and broad". An early Greek language mention of plakous as a dessert (or second table delicacy) comes from the poems of Archestratos. He describes plakous as served with nuts or dried fruits and commends the honey-drenched Athenian version of plakous.Antiphanes, a contemporary of Archestratos, provided an ornate description of plakous:"The streams of the tawny bee, mixed with the curdled river of bleating she-goats, placed upon a flat receptacle of the virgin daughter of Demeter [honey, cheese, flour], delighting in ten thousand delicate toppings – or shall I simply say plakous?"
 * I'm for plakous.
 * — In the Byzantine Empire, the traditional placenta cake (known as "koptoplakous", κοπτοπλακοῦς), a dish similar to baklava, was consumed. The earliest known detailed recipe for placenta, from the 2nd century BC, is a honey-covered baked layered-dough dessert which food historian Patrick Faas identifies as the origin of baklava.
 * Historian Andrew Dalby speculates as to why Cato's section on bread and cakes, which he describes as "recipes in a Greek tradition", are included in De Agricultura: "Possibly Cato included them so that the owner and guests might be entertained when visiting the farm; possibly so that proper offerings might be made to the gods; more likely, I believe, so that profitable sales might be made at a neighbouring market."
 * Cato's original recipe for placenta follows:"Shape the placenta as follows: place a single row of tracta along the whole length of the base dough. This is then covered with the mixture [cheese and honey] from the mortar. Place another row of tracta on top and go on doing so until all the cheese and honey have been used up. Finish with a layer of tracta. ... place the placenta in the oven and put a preheated lid on top of it ... When ready, honey is poured over the placenta."
 * — According to a number of scholars, koptoplakous(κοπτοπλακοῦς) was a precursor to the modern baklava. Historian Speros Vryonis describes koptoplakous as a "Byzantine favorite" and "the same as the Turkish baklava", as do other writers. The name (Greek: πλατσέντα) is used today on the island of Lesbos for thin layered pastry leaves with crushed nuts, baked, and covered in syrup.
 * Now as you can see, many food historians identify it as the origin of baklava and as you also cans ee, the recipes are similar, especially the first one of the 8th century before christ.
 * This means that there is no consensus that baklava was founded in the topkapi palace. Therefore the Ottoman origin should be removed from infobox.
 * The ottoman translation is useless as well. The transltion already is written in etymology part and has therefore no reason to be in the beginning too, also the etymology part explains that Its origin is contested, as It could be of mongolian, turkic persian or a mixed origin. So the etymology part also doesnt say that the word originates from ottoman turkish and even if there are other names for the dessert and It already is mentioned in etynology part. Also, why was my reply deleted? I just answered him and try to discuss with him on how to better this page…..
 * 2A02:8071:5860:2A0:1035:788D:D020:A589 (talk) 14:43, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 July 2024
Turkey Soguk Baklava is a modern variation of traditional baklava, served chilled and topped with milk and cocoa powder. This refreshing version is especially popular in Turkey during the summer months. Cajuntavuk (talk) 03:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.   [[User:CanonNi ]]  (talk • contribs) 04:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)