Talk:Falafel/Archive 1

Use of Palestine rather than Israel
In the historical context, Palestine is more correct, as Israel refers to the modern state. Do not revert it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.25.86 (talk) 18:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I checked the source, it says "And the falafel itself keeps changing. The original Egyptian dish was made with fava beans; as falafel moved northward, cooks substituted chickpeas". Therefore, I removed references to Syria and Palestine and added Egypt.  This makes it true to the source. --Nsaum75 (talk) 18:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Why was the reference to Syria and Palestine removed altogether? Is it because it failed to mention Israel? What the fuck, honestly. Stop touching the article! 124.169.25.86 (talk) 18:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The line the source uses, regarding "migration" does not mention Syria or Palestine. It simply says it migrated north, therefore I ask that you revert your edit, so that the text truthfully represents the source. --Nsaum75 (talk) 18:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Ahh, sorry, I didn't see what you said before. Fair enough :] I'll just say, funny that it takes an "edit war" for an editor to realise the article contains details absent in the source, yet I get a warning saying my edit was not constructive. Why were Israel and Syria mentioned to begin with? It's all utter balls. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.25.86 (talk) 18:58, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Etymology
The dictionary says falafel means "little peppers" and that it's actually derived from latin "piper" meaning pepper.
 * In Arabic, that would be filfil (فلفل) rather than falafel (فلافل); there is one more letter in the word falafel. --Khalid 22:24, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * I've seen this etymology, however, in several dictionaries, such as the American Heritage Dictionary: "Arabic falāfil, pl. of filfil, pepper, probably from Sanskrit pippalī." I'm going to go ahead and add it. Unfortunately, I know neither Arabic nor Tamil. Lesgles 15:34, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * What I've seen is falafel <(Eng) felafel < fulaful*, the plural of ful. This always made sense to me, since falafel was traditionally made from fava beans. --Mgreenbe 17:33, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * No, falafel is the plural of filfil, I don't know if ful has a plural but if it did it couldn't be falafel. Falafel is almost always in my experience made with chickpeas, which are called "hummus" in Arabic. By the way, falafel as street food is surely almost always a sandwich (in pita bread or otherwise?) I think there is a little redundancy in the current way this is phrased. Palmiro | Talk 21:42, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation! Redundancy fixed, good point.  --Mgreenbe 09:05, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Israeli and Arab falafel
This was bound to happen. I deleted 207.255.174.254's controversy section because it was poorly composed and (I may be POV here) inaccurate. I'm currently living in Israel and have never seen "Israeli falafel". There is, in fact a distinction between Israeli and Arab falafel -- I find the latter to be bigger and more richly spiced, often to the point of a piquant sourness. This might be something nice to mention.

No one in Israel is trying to say that Israelis/Jews invented falafel. In fact, my experience has shown that falafel (and pita, by the by) is seen as a uniting force, which brings many Israelis into the Arab communities and vice versa. I've yet to encounter 'dismay' on either side that the other eats falafel. I would be interested to see a source on the "dismay" and "theft" mentioned. --Mgreenbe 11:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

This is the person whose edits you have deleted. You claim that I appear biased in my edits. It seems amusing to me that you don't feel the same way about yourself, being a Jew. I'm not predjudiced agaisnt you or your people, but I am also not afraid to tell the truth. Many stores claim many Arabic foods as "Israeli". Imagine if someone marketed Haunukah as a Christian holiday. Don't tell me it wouldn't bother you. Calling Hummus and Falafel Israeli cusine is biased to begin with.


 * Well, perhaps you should give a source for this. Wikipedia policy is that you should cite sources for your edits. While this is often ignored, it really is necessary if your edit is controversial. I've certainly heard Arabs complaining the odd time about falafel being described as Israeli food, but is this really a major controversy? After all, many Israelis are of Arab origin, being immigrants from Iraq, Egypt etc as well as native Palestinian Jews, and it's hardly surprising that they should keep their native cuisine. Palmiro | Talk 22:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Then why call it by a different name? Why give credit where it isnt due? and why, WHY is there an Israeli cusine section on wikipedia with a bunch of Palestinian foods, and why is there not a Palestinian cuisine section?


 * I would like to see a source that Israelis call falafel by a different name. The modern Hebrew word comes from Arabic!


 * Who's "giving credit"? The Israeli cuisine category includes all food popular enough in Israel to be considered a national food.  It does not mean that Israel invented the food.  According to the article, falafel may have originated in India -- should it not be listed as Middle Eastern cuisine?


 * There isn't a Palestinian cuisine category on Wikipedia because no one has written it. Why don't you?  I wouldn't be able to write too much about it, as my experience with Palestinian food is just with falafel (delicious) and the beer Taybeh (better than Goldstar!).  Since many Palestinian foods with existing articles have entries in Wikipedia -- say, falafel :) -- the category could be quickly populated.  If you create the category, I'll do research for a write-up on Taybeh.  In fact, if I have free time later, I'll create the category and populate it as best I can.  --Mgreenbe 11:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Actually, there is a Category:Palestinian cuisine, though it's not adequately populated! Please look harder before launching these accusations. Other Palestinian foods with articles: Mujaddara, arak (liqueur), shawarma, baklava, knafeh. Palmiro | Talk 18:19, 5 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I didn't even think to check! Added what wasn't already in there.  I'd never heard of knafeh; gotta go to Nablus!  --Mgreenbe 23:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Nablus is largeley a destroyed battered city with dilapidated houses and broken spirits. One time they pioneered the delicious kinafa, now their lives are ruined after their land was stolen and their sons were killed. The joyful spirit of Palestinians is dead absorbed into the mist. Their hope is dead they don't want to make kinafa

Common guys, Falafel is no more "Israeli" food than Borscht is, both with obvious origins, in now Israel been such a community of immigrants it would be plain silly to claim 'inventing' such food. I think a more interesting fact, is the 'fussion' kitchen in Israel, notably about Falafel, the fact that one can buy Falafel with beetroot is probably such an example. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.84.24.136 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


 * No one claimed Israel invented falafel. It is "regarded there as a national food".  It's true, it is regarded here as a national food; I had it for lunch and felt very patriotic.  There are even postcards, "Falafel, the Israeli national food".  I think the beetroot may be a Persian-Jewish innovation; I think they're also responsible for the beet-pickled eggplants, which are, might I add, incredibly delicious.  Care to find out and post cited prose? --Mgreenbe 14:09, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Another Israeli innovation with their falafel that you don't traditionally find with Arab falafel is sauerkraut...maybe Yekkes, German Jewish immigrants to Israel started adding it? It's just food people, don't politicize it. And Israelis proclaiming it as a national dish doesn't mean that they are stealing it from Arabs. It just means it's the most popular street food in Israel. Turks and Greeks also eat falafel by the way, nobody accuses them of stealing it from the Arabs/Palestinians. Texan gringos are also into tacos and burritos, but made their own version of it...they haven't stolen Latino culture. And don't forget that more than half of the Israeli Jewish population are Jews from Arab countries, they also grew up with falafel...so stop with the BS about Israelis "stealing falafel from the Palestinians". It's a regional food of the Middel East and Meditteranean basin, and guess what...Israel is in that region (and there to stay) and most of its people have roots in that region!

In Italy pasta is a national food, it came from China. In Ireland potatoes are a national food, that came from South America (in some Jewish households potatoes are almost a national food. Blintzes are a typical Jewish food, but they came from Russia. --Brat32 21:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Indian falafel
I was surprised by that the first time I saw it. That was one long-lived piece of vandalism, if so - a bit scary! Palmiro | Talk 02:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Lebanese?
thats good that someone mentioned that the falafel brigns together the arabs and the jews.

but no one where does it mention anyhting about Lebanon. Lebanon is the ultimate falafel hub. falafel is typically known as lebanese food. we need some lebanese stuff on it.

yes israel has falafel but we need some arab country information on falafil &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.218.41.202 (talk • contribs) 10:13, 21 January 2006 UTC.


 * Be bold &mdash; while maintaining NPOV, of course. --Mgreenbe 11:13, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Best falafel in NYC, Bread from Beiruit on 45th St. If I also mentioned that Ess-a-Bagel has the best bagels, would that make it more POV?--129.252.176.46 21:23, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Yep; but I'll check it out next time I'm in the City. There's also Azori (sp.) on the Upper West Side; the Jewish "falafel nazi".  Supposed to be good, but don't take my word for it. --Mgreenbe 00:50, 17 February 2006 (UTC)


 * In NSW Australia the best falafel in Sydney is at Fatima's Lebanese Restaurant, Cleveland St, Surry Hills. While up the coast the best in NSW is Yami Falafel, Park St, Brunswick Heads which is an Israeli vegitarian resturant. Good food is one of the scarce foundations upon which to build peace. Don't let food become another battle ground—Dananimal 03:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

French fried potatoes, known as chips?
They're certainly not known by that name in Lebanon. Anywhere else? Palmiro | Talk 14:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Israel. Or, retrograde "chipsim".  (Almost as hilarious as schnitzelim.)  I think the sentence originally mentioned only Israel; when Lebanon and UAE were added, the user must not have noticed the clause.  But regardless, in most of the world french fries are known as chips.  I'll take it out.  Out of curiousity, what are they called in Lebanon? --Mgreenbe 15:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Batata! or batata maqliyye, if necessary. I think most Lebanese would just call them potatoes in English, though I don't really know. It's very unusual to find potatoes cooked any other way in Syrian or Lebanese restaurants unless they are part of a stew or made dish.
 * Are you sure people put za3tar on falafel? OK, it's not at the peanut butter-in-hummus level, but I've never heard of it, whereas sumac is always added here in Syria at least. And it's the wrong colour! Palmiro | Talk 15:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Batata? That's Hebrew for sweet potato.  Makes some sense: the German/French "apple of the ground" (tapuach adama) took hold for potato, but Ben Yehuda would have stuck with the Arabic.
 * I've seen it on shawarma, but never falafel; I was only correcting the extant link to sumac. --Mgreenbe 15:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * It looks to me like you changed the reference to sumac into one to za3tar. Did you mean to? As for schnitzelim, I seem to recall you remarking once that you didn't think it would be found in Levantine cuisine. And probably not as such, but we do have iskalúb bané in most restaurants - can you work it out? Palmiro | Talk 15:49, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I've never seen sumac used on its own in the Middle East and assumed the usage was a mistranslation (a very common one here in Israel). If you've seen sumac on falafel but not za`atar, we should just change it back. As for iskalup bané, the best I can get out of it is some sort of "scalloped" piece of meat. (I mention schnitzelim because it's a Hebrew plural on a german word; my German friends find it beyond ridiculous.) --Mgreenbe 16:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Anon user is right, in Lebanese use "batata" or "batata maqlyeh", even in menus they may use "french fries" but rarely "chips", because it refers to potato chips. CG 16:03, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that's the first paragraph of Palmiro's post. --Mgreenbe 16:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

QUESTION ABOUT ETYMOLOGY: Is it common to have a quadrilitiral root in Arabic made up of a doubling of a two letter root? Of course, there is FLFL and ZLZL, but are there many others? It seems to me that in Arabic this is rare whereas in Hebrew it is more frequent. (David ; yishalom@sbcglobal.net)

Bedouin origin
My uncle works for the US Department of Agriculture and is quite familiar with the history of most foods including falafel. He says it's originally Egyptian. Some guy was wondering how they deep fried back then. To this day and age, some people in the middle east deep fry in large pots without electricity the same way that they wash their clothes. (unsigned post)


 * Yes, falafel is usually considered Egyptian (though that is hard to prove). And of course there is deep-frying without electricity -- that's not the issue. The issue is that bedouins are nomads.  Deep-frying is not a typical cooking technique for nomads.  It is more likely that it is a city vendor's snack in origin. Anyway, if it's not , it is at least  because no source is given for this theory. --Macrakis 02:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, up until the late eighties, we still did deep frying in Lebanon the way I described it. Up to this day, there are still plenty of people in the villages who still do so.  And considering bedouins to this day still cook this way, and most historians agree that the falafel is quite old, then the fact that it is deep-fried today using an electric stove has no bearing on how it was cooked a long time ago.  It could have been deep-fried then the old way, or it could have been baked and evolved over time for efficiency. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.48.69.100 (talk) 03:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC).


 * Could you please re-read what I said? Electricity has nothing to do with it, and of course there are people in villages who deep-fry.  Villagers are not nomads. But what evidence is there that falafel is of Egyptian bedouin origin?  A source is needed. --Macrakis 13:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Falafel Link
To whom it may concern, I have read the article about falafel before and was interested in trying to make it. I never got it to taste right and wasted time and money on igredients trying. I wanted to help others who after reading your article also want to try falafel. So I decided to make a website offering a Falafel Kit. The kit contains a dry mix that has a traditional mid-east recipe and allows others to make falafel very easily without trying to mix all kinds of ingredients. It also allows others to get a true taste of the mid-eastern food. I would like to link my site WWW.FalafelKits.COM to the falafel page. I will also add a Wikipedia-Falafel link to my site. Thank you for you time, FalafelKits 00:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * We don't present commercial links on Wikipedia. Sorry.--C.Logan 01:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Removed "History" section
In the interest of WP:NPOV I have removed the "History" section. First, it seems duplicated with the "Cultural" section and second, it looked entirely based on the actions of a confirmed sockpuppetteer POV pusher who was causing trouble on many food-related articles. M1rth (talk) 22:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. I srongly object to you removal of this information which I have restored. It does not duplicated information anywhere in the article. I added it myself and it's based directly on the source cited. Please articulate a reason in line with Wikipedia policies or guidelines as to why this information is not relevant to this article. Claiming that "anti-Israel" "sockpuppets" added it, does not constitute one. Particularly since it is not even true.  T i a m u t talk 09:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Gilabrand, please stop changing the text to read as you wish it did, rather than what the reliable sources cited actually state. WP:NPOV does not mean replacing text that you find offensive with text than you think is "neutral". It means reporting what reliable sources say and attributing the varied viewpoints to them. As such, I have restored this paragraph:"Orna Agmon has compared the history of falafel to that of the sabra, the local prickly fruit that Palestinians ate for centuries before Israelis started using the word as a nickname for native-born Israelis. Ammiel Alcalay, a Jewish professor of Middle Eastern culture, similarly believes that 'it's total appropriation,' and that Israelis have claimed falafel in the same way that they have Jaffa oranges and the spice mixture zaatar."

Your version which read: "The history of falafel has been compared to that of the sabra, the local prickly fruit that local residents ate for centuries before the word became a nickname for native-born Israelis. Ammiel Alcalay, a Jewish professor of Middle Eastern culture, similarly believes that Israelis have claimed falafel in the same way that they have Jaffa oranges and the spice mixture zaatar." changed ther meaning of the text completely, so as to imply that there was no cultural appropriation involved, when Alcalay and Agmon are quite clear that in their opinion, there was.  T i a m u t talk 11:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I will "neutralize" the texts, so that they are encyclopedic - or they won't be used here. You are adding contentious material deliberately. Now that certain editors have been blocked indefinitely, perhaps now is the time to rethink whether efforts to politicize this article are worth your while.--Gilabrand (talk) 11:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) Gilabrand, you are doing it again, and without even discussing. The article explains a lot of varied viewpoints on the falafel debate. These need to be attributed to their owners. Instead of deleting or changing the viewpoints you think are unapaltable from those provided by the source says, why not add other viewpoints? For example: you can add something from this section:"Jewish and Israeli attitudes toward the falafel debate range from defiance to ambivalence to outright shame — just as they do toward the conflict at large. Some Jews point out that no single group can own a method for frying a mush of legumes; they say that falafel is generically Middle Eastern, having originated in Egypt and found its way as far as Morocco and Saudi Arabia. 'Have we stolen pasta from the Italians?' asked Geoffrey Weill, who does public relations for Israel's Ministry of Tourism. 'What kind of nonsense is that?' Hagay Nagar, the Israeli co-owner of Hoomoos Asli in New York, says that falafel is now 'an international food, like a hamburger.' (Nevertheless, his restaurant has an Arabic name: 'Asli,' a word adopted by Israeli slang, means 'original' in Arabic.)"


 * Your edits are downplaying the contestation over the issue of falafel's ownership, rather than fully explaining it to the reader. I'm surprised by your lack of understanding and respect for WP:NPOV. Please self-revert and add what you feel needs to be added to achieve balance, instead of doing it by mangling the meaning of the text in place.  T i a m u t talk 11:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Nobody "owns" felafel. The article states it originated in Egypt and is eaten throughout the Middle East and now, the world. What is your interest in perpetuating this stupid, political argument? Felafel is enjoyed by many people and considered an element of Arab cuisine. That can be stated quite simply, without bringing in the opinion of every street cleaner, dishwasher and felafel seller in NY, not to mention attention seeking researchers who need to spice up their thesis to get someone to read it. Here on Wikipedia, we have an opportunity to make the world a better place by offering information. Your material is political, and is phrased in a style that will only keep the debate over this page raging. What a waste of creative energy.--Gilabrand (talk) 11:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

How sad. This said though, I think the article should report the controversy so I would propose starting a sourced section on the controversy itself, as a sub-section of a thoroughly sourced history section. By sourced, I would tend to agree with what Gilabrand implies: Sourced PoV and opinion can be helpful but it must come from a published expert. I don't think owning a restaurant qualifies anyone as a food historian (although a food historian may own a restaurant), so sundry published quotes from retail vendors may not be reliable. Gwen Gale (talk) 12:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Since you people can't stop the warring...
I've created Talk:Falafel/Workshop. Propose edits THERE. Let's not have more of this nightmare on food pages. M1rth (talk) 13:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've restored the history section because I see no need to delete its sourced information during the discussion. Moreover, I think it's ok to add more sourced material of whatever PoV to the article without bringing it up first on the talk page, so long as the source meets WP:V. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

To clarify, I only restored the sourced history section as a starting point for discussion, thinking more sources would show up shortly and balance the section's PoV. Had I known a request to protect the page had been made, I would not have restored the section. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

editprotected Gwen and I are in agreement : the best way to resolve the dispute is to remove the section to the created workshop page where both sides will be equally forced to work out their differences rather than seeing a "default" version protected. We are requesting Gwen's last edit prior to page protection be reverted, as per Gwen's statement above and this diff. M1rth (talk) 17:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ - A l is o n  ❤ 17:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

History Section
This RfC created to hopefully get a few more editors to help out on Talk:Falafel/Workshop. I hope this is a good use of RfC, let's see if a few more eyes can't help the troubles. For users coming in new, see the talk page above and the page history for various different versions. M1rth (talk) 18:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the history section should be reinstated. It's removal seems POV. Falafel has a long Arab history, and a short Israeli (and rest of the world) one. That said, I'm not a fan of the wording. Isn't enough to have a short line or two explaining that the falafel is now popular in Israel and some feel that it has been appropriated as an 'authentically' Israeli food - rather than the extended attack which was there. We don't need to turn this article into cultural war, even if we make brief mention of it. Falafel is too good a food for that - I'm a white New Zealander and I love it as much as anyone! Mostlyharmless (talk) 05:05, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * For your edification, the History section was removed to a workshop page so that neither side of the POV dispute had reason to feel that "their" version was protected. I had hoped this would encourage them to come together an work on a compromise version, with the entire goal of re-adding a proper version and not having more edit wars. Care to propose a version on the workshop page please? M1rth (talk) 07:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with Mostlyharmless and have made some minor modifications to his edits at the workshop page. But where are we supposed to discuss those edits? Could those who need to discuss the changes open a section for that here? Thanks.  T i a m u t talk 11:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * It's odd that an article about food has been fully protected because of edit warring. I can't pretend to be an expert on whether falafel is an authentic Arab or Israeli dish, but it is served widely in both cultures and the wording of the article should reflect this, and not be used as a battleground for political issues.  -- ♦Ian Ma c  M♦  (talk to me) 11:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Documenting the history of how a dish invented and consumed primarilyl by Arabs, came to be considered "Israeli"m and also eaten worldwide is relevant to the article. It is unfortunate that people are offended by historical facts, but that doesn't mean the information should not be included. It is also unfortunate that people have failed to discuss these issues calmly and that everything associated with the Middle East seems to morph into a political battle. But we cannot avoid reporting on things just because they are controversial. Wikipedia is not censored.  T i a m u t talk 12:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Protected
Fully protected - due to the level of disruptive edit-warring over the last few weeks. As M1rth says, please use the talk page to resolve your issues instead. Let me know when things are sorted and I'll lift the article protect. Thanks - A l is o n  ❤ 15:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Falafel/Workshop and Talk:Falafel/Workshop
Tiamut, since you asked, I have moved Talk:Falafel/Workshop to Falafel/Workshop so that Talk:Falafel/Workshop can be used to discuss edits in an easier fashion. Thank you for pointing this out and I hope it helps. M1rth (talk) 17:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

re: Falafel has been part of the diet of Arabs, as well as Mizrahi Jews for centuries.
Are you challenging this statement? If so, on what grounds? Or are you objecting to the source alone? If you object to the source, why? And why is that enough to remove this line? I don’t honestly know what kind of a reputation e-cookbooks has, but I do know that it is a third-party that publishes non-controversial and non-extremist material directly relevant to the topic, making it appropriate to the context. - Irn (talk) 17:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * So I realized that the Kantor article is actually from the NYTimes, which kind of renders this discussion a moot point; however, I still want to hear your responses, if you could take the time to do so. - Irn (talk) 17:35, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Hebrew name
Falafel is an Arabic word, so why do we have the Hebrew transliteration of the Arabic after the bolded term in the introduction? I should note that we are having the same discussion at Talk:Za'atar and that I've asked at the WP:MoS talk page for some guidance on how to deal with other languages in parentheses. My own personal opinion is that the transliteration in languages not related to the term's etymology are unnecessary and raise the question of where to draw the line (for example, should we also list how falafel is transcribed in Greek?) Your feedback, here, at Za'atar or the MoS page, would be appreciated.  T i a m u t talk 01:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think we should follow the solution used on Za'atar and give the Hebrew name lower down in the article when it is mentioned in an Israeli context. I myself remember restoring the Hebrew name after it was removed, but that was only because a vandal had repeatedly tried to remove every reference to Israel. Lesgles (talk) 16:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed, though this is a closer call than za'atar. Jd2718 (talk) 18:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * What makes it a closer call? -- Irn (talk) 03:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * While the word is Arabic, it really has been fully adopted by Israelis, to the point where I believe (do not know) that many no longer are aware of its origins. That does not seem to be the case with za'atar. While personal experience is worth nothing here, I'll note all the same that here in New York we can buy a variety of Arab or Israeli felafel, but I only know Arab places to buy za'atar (and I see Israelis in those places, too.) Jd2718 (talk) 04:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Zaatar is sold at all stores in the U.S. that sell Israeli products and kosher food. It comes in a small, pyramid-shaped carton clearly marked as Za'atar in Hebrew and English.thumb|100px

Israeli-Arabic Conflict everywhere
Arab-israeli Controversy? Even Palestinian?? On a Falafel article??? Have u all gone mad? First I was a little skeptic about wikipedia loosing it's value but now I know the disease spread to every hole possible. Dan Almagor WTF?? everybody laughed about the song in israel that it's not true, but ITS NOT THAT IMPORTANT TO BE NOTED ON FALAFEL. I was rubbing my eyes to read this shit about "leading many Palestinians and Arabs to resent the cultural appropriation of this iconic food." there are no words to describe the disproportional writing... this is the low u can get i'm serious. god help u.--Bob1969 (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Insufficient and poorly written article
This article is very poorly written, you either mention all its origin countries or nothing. The modern falafel most people recognize today is made with chickpeas as a base and this falafel originate from Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and has been eaten in those territories for as long as anyone can remember. This article should emphasize more on those countries. --Beyrouthhh (talk) 23:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Turkish restaurants all sell Falafell
I have to a few Turkish restaurants all they all sell fallafel. So I am not sure why it merely mentioned Arab regions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.246.86 (talk) 23:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Arabic case endings are not optional
They are commonly omitted, but this is wrong. If you watched Arabic news and formal media you would see that they are still fully realized. HD1986 (talk) 07:08, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

The word "falafel" is not Arabic per se (at least not formal Arabic). The formal Arabic word is "falāfilu." Arabic is not like Greek, there is no "Demotic" Arabic ... There is only one formal Arabic whose grammar is just exactly the same as the grammar of Classical Arabic, and there are countless modern "informal" dialects that are never written down nor used for anything formal or close to formal. HD1986 (talk) 10:13, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it's ridiculous to include ʾiʿrab for falāfil; no variety of modern spoken Arabic pronounces the ʾiʿrab. As for your claim that Modern Standard Arabic (fuṣḥā) is "exactly the same as the grammar of Classical Arabic", though this is the traditional position, I don't think you'll find any serious linguists who agree. --macrakis (talk) 01:39, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say modern formal Arabic is identical to Classical Arabic, I said the grammar of modern formal Arabic is identical to Classical Arabic's. I don't think there is anybody who would disagree with that. Give me one gramatical difference between modern and classical Arabic? Of course there are few unofficial differences (like in the rules of pause) but these are looked at in the Arab cultures as "common mistakes" not as differences; there is not a single source or institution teaching Arabic whose primary grammatical reference is not Classical Arabic. HD1986 (talk) 04:02, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Can I write the US motto as E PLURIB UN? No, I can't or that wouldn't be Latin but Spanish, Portuguese, French or whatever. Same thing, flafel is Syrian, Egyptian, Saudi. etc. but is not Arabic. HD1986 (talk) 04:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * In English-language sources (including the most scholarly), the citation form of Arabic words is invariably given without inflectional endings (ʾiʿrab). The definitive Encyclopaedia of Islam (2nd ed.), ed. P. Bearman et al. writes  GH i dh ā, samn, simsim, etc..  Even the Encyclopedia of the Qurʾan, which unquestionably covers the most classical of Arabic, refers to aqwāt etc. The Oxford English Dictionary's etymology of falafel gives the source as falāfil. You may be correct in some abstract sense, but Wikipedia follows the best available sources, and they unanimously indicate that Arabic words are cited without ʾiʿrab. --macrakis (talk) 12:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I have read enough material in Semitic linguistics to know that what you say is not true. Many sources do cite the Arabic words properly, but as I've told you already, this is just a common mistake that is not admissible by any authoroty concerned with the Arabic language. However, as far as I am confident that you are wrong, so what? I'm not going to waste any more time over this discussion. I don't understand what makes people so enthusiastic about editing WP. It is really boring and an absolute waste of time. Bye in Greek. HD1986 (talk) 17:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Since you have not found any sources supporting your position here or in the discussion on Talk:Bet (letter), I think we have to go with the best source we have, namely the Encyclopedia of Islam. --macrakis (talk) 22:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

If you are going to modify the transliteration, make sure that you don't leave it italic. HD86 (talk) 00:19, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * ? Italics are the standard way of mentioning non-English words. --macrakis (talk) 20:42, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Not when you make them look like transliterations ... you just keep on making these false transliterations and eventually you'll see me suing you for systemic deception ... HD86 (talk) 21:22, 15 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Ha ha.
 * By the way: "If you make legal threats or take legal action over a Wikipedia dispute, you may be blocked from editing so that the matter is not exacerbated through other channels. Users who make legal threats will typically be blocked from editing indefinitely while legal threats are outstanding." No legal threats --macrakis (talk) 04:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't be suing Wikipedia, I would be suing you, Macrakis (Arabic: al-muqarqisu المقرقس). HD86 (talk) 16:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Threatening to sue me constitutes a legal threat under Wikipedia's No legal threats policy, even if it is (as in this case) an absurd threat. If you want to change WP's policy on this, you can pursue it at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Arabic). --macrakis (talk) 13:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I see you have become an expert in the Wiki law. You are certainly going to need that. HD86 (talk) 16:02, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

POV Dispute
Section is written solely using sources that appear in publications which are genenerally supportive of the Israeli State. Although this is English Wikipedia, and a by its very nature has a bias towards viewpoints from english speaking countries (US/UK etc), it fails to faithfully represent viewpoints of Arab and Muslim countries in regards to the Israeli adoption of Falafel. Perhaps someone should consult the Arabic or Farsi versions of Wikipedia to help balance out the information presented here; or at the VERY LEAST consult and INCLUDE some middle-eastern (non Israel) based sources for the Israel & Palestine sections. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avayaricoh (talk • contribs) 22:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree, it is obvious that the English WP often adoptes Israeli POV's in its articles; most of the Arab users I'v talked to agree on that.

However, as for the food, although it is true that Arabs despised how Israelis stole Falafel and ascribed it to themselves, it is just only one dish. It is not like they stole the whole Middle Eastern cuisine. I actually have never seen anyone asking why every Middle Eastern dish turns out to be Lebanese? I mean, Lebanon is just so small and represents probably less than 2% of the total area in Middle East, and it is not a real nation, it is just a country that was invented yesterday ... yet somehow every Middle Eastern food turns out to be Lebanese and is known around the world as Lebanese. So why are you angry with the Israelis? It is just Falafel ... HD1986 (talk) 07:06, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Any thoughts on the new section titled "'Israeli falafel' controversy"? --Nsaum75 (talk) 15:37, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

It was, initially, a response to Jayjg's cynical NPOV (*sarcasm*) "concerns". I even admited that my initial version could have been pushing a POV, and i watered it down a lot of my own volition. He wanted to white-wash it further down. Then accused me of manipulating the source. I'm no Joan Peters manipulating Ottoman records to publish my own From Time Immemorial. I did no manipulating of anything. I merely added context which was already made by the source itself. I never said everything in the falafel article was a direct quote. Besides, one needs not direct quote everything, paraphrasing is fine too. Even summarising the essence of the article for time's convenience. Still, Jayjg kept reverting.

At the end of the day, the section (however it came about) is relevant. Al-Andalus (talk) 17:01, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd rather have falafel being called Israeli than tabboule and fattoush being called Lebanese. HD86 (talk) 17:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * That's funny. LOL. I personally see the Lebanese claim to falafel, tabboule, hummus, etc. as just financially motivated.


 * As for the Israeli "claim", I personally (and this is MY personal opinion, in contrast to what I've contributed on the article, which in actuality, doesn't conform with my own view) consider falafel to be 100% Israeli, no more and no less than it is the authentic cuisine of any other country, however long or short it may have been "popular" among the modern denizens. I often contribute things that contradict my own stance, if that's how things are.


 * But back to falafel, and having said I consider it 100% Israeli too; was it invented there? No. We know that, but that wasn't the issue. It wasn't invented in Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan, Iraqi, Yemen, Syria, etc. either (where it is also considered a traditional food). That doesn't mean any of them have any less right to call it their traditional food, so likewise for Israel.


 * What I contested as POV was the removal of the mention of how it existed in Israel/Palestine before the Mizrahim popularized it upon their immigration to Israel, from whatever country each originated from. Their arrival popularised the food which was already present since they were already familiar with it, not as Jews, but as people sharing a common Arab culture. That's all I wanted reflected, but unfortunately, that is something that offends the sensibilities of certain people who try to obliterate any reminder of the wonderful culture associated to unique communities of Jews from the Arab world who had their culture obliterated and despised, swept under the rug as if it were something to be ashamed of. Get over it, is my advice.


 * Anyway, despite my objection to the views expressed by the groups or people mentioned in the new section, I do believe they are relevant, otherwise I wouldn't have created the section (especially considering that they do not align with my personal views on the matter). Al-Andalus (talk) 01:17, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't attribute material to sources that they haven't said. I've cleaned that up for you again, but it's an egregious violation of policy, and if you do it again, I'll simply revert. I hope that's clear. Jayjg (talk) 00:51, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok Jayjg, then answer this. Why do you keep removing the "Still" from the quote "Still, it wasn't until..." What on earth do you think the "Still" refers to? It refers to the Palestinians history of falafel. The Palestinians are the context of the source article. If you don't agree, what context do you think it is in? Does "it wasn't until" refer to an implication that before the Mizrahim, falafel didn't exist in Israel/Palestine. Or, does "it wasn't until" refer to an implication that before the Mizrahim, falafel wasnt popular among Israelis, although having already been present and consumed by Palestinians? I know it irks you, but mate, be sincere for once. Don't shave down the quote. Leave it as "Still, it wasn't until...." and just put it in the context set out by the article itself. Al-Andalus (talk) 06:21, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 1. Do not speculate about why people say things. According to the source, the "Still" refers to the fact that "These Zionists, by and large socialists, loved humble street foods like falafel."
 * 2. This edit introduced irrelevant material from unreliable sources that was also a word for word copy of the source. Don't do that again.
 * 3. Comment on content, not on the contributor.
 * I hope that's clear. Jayjg (talk) 01:47, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE
It would appear that 1/3 of the article about Falafel is now actually about "The 'Israeli falafel' controversy", and sourced mostly to two newspaper articles. This is an obvious violation of WP:UNDUE. Unless I hear some compelling arguments to the contrary, I'll be cutting that section down to a size that complies with WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 00:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I object and qould suggest that you instead work on expanding the article, which requires a lot more information on the history of Falafel. Taking out material that discusses that history simply because it presently focuses on the food's more recent history in the Israeli context is most certainly not a solution.  T i a m u t talk 15:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Please make "a compelling argument to the contrary"; the article currently violates WP:UNDUE. Jayjg (talk) 01:43, 31 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't see any undue weight. Looks like the section is less than 1/4, not 1/3. Quite reasonable. The first three paragraphs are direct, brief, and well-sourced. Perhaps the last one (about Lebanese claims, traveling a tangent to feta) could be pruned or removed. Jd2718 (talk) 02:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * 1/4 of the entire article about falafel, a ubiquitous Middle Eastern food, is about an obscure claim that Israel "appropriated" it from its "real" owners? Aside from the absurdity of the dispute, it's an obvious violation of WP:UNDUE. This dispute could and should be described in two sentences. Unless I hear some compelling arguments to the contrary, I'll be cutting that section down to a size that complies with WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 02:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Please do not edit against consensus. And please choose language more carefully. There is no need, especially on an I/P page, to intentionally select words that tend to inflame. You know better. Jd2718 (talk) 04:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm going to have to agree with Jayjg, that it violates WP:UNDUE and possibly WP:POV. There are quite a few direct quotes in the section -- some of them several sentences long. Perhaps it would be best to state the facts using encyclopedic language, instead of so many quotes, which tends to make the section read in such a way that it seems the article is taking a particular stance or giving undue weight to the issue. --Nsaum75 (talk) 15:15, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm going to remove the last paragraph of the section. I can't find supporting evidence for the notability of the organization (The Lebanese Industrial Association was threatening the suit) nor for its spokesman. The have also claimed that they would sue over felafel. I have found no evidence that these suits were actually filed. This was a non-notable news story about an event (a threat of a suit) that has not, going forward, attracted much attention. There remain six sentences in the section, broken into three paragraphs (presumably for readability). They cover the question briefly, directly, and with good sources. Jd2718 (talk) 23:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not just that the section violates WP:UNDUE, it also fundamentally violated NPOV in other ways. For example, the source article includes quotes from people both supporting and refuting the "Israel stole falafel" view, yet only quotations from the former had been included in the article. I've fixed that now, but, of course, that only make the section longer. Jayjg (talk) 01:22, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You've included a response to a response, which I will remove. You've also included a source that makes a direct claim of falafel being Israeli. That might properly belong. Jd2718 (talk) 03:30, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * "Response to a response"? What's that? Please point out the section in policy where I can read more about that. Jayjg (talk) 03:44, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Nathan's quote puts forward an argument. Weill simply attacks (and in a particularly snarky and content-free way). The former balances, the latter makes WP sound like talk radio. It is, simply, the most extreme single line in a 20 paragraph newspaper article; it was selected poorly. Jd2718 (talk) 14:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Some people could argue, that due to the nature and wording of all the quotes here, it makes the section read like talk radio. I've noticed that on WP, in general, many editors often resort to the inclusion of long or extensive quotes, to bias an article one way or another, in order to avoid violating WP:NPOV.  That way, when what they have written is challenged, they can counter with the argument "Its sourced". Usually then the challenge is dropped.


 * In any case, if you open any "pressed-wood-pulp" encyclopedias, unless the article is about a human person, its rare to see quotes used to further the content of an article. --Nsaum75 (talk) 15:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * On the contrary, Jd2718, Weill puts forth the argument that it's quite silly to claim Israel "stole" falafel from the Palestinians, just as it's silly to claim they stole pasta from the Italians. The Palestinians didn't invent falafel; that was probably Egyptian Copts, and in any event, it's now a food prepared, eaten, and modified by many different countries in the region. Removing cogent counter-arguments is a violation of WP:NPOV, please don't do it again. Jayjg (talk) 22:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Come on Jayjg ... Israelis have just arrived there yesterday, do you really believe they participated in the invention of falfel? You're making me start to believe that the "Lebanese" dishes may actually be Lebanese, lol ... HD86 (talk) 05:47, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Jews have been in the middle east as long as Arabs have. Not all Jews are Israelis and not all Israelis are Jews. That said, Israel is officially a "Jewish state" (much like Syria is an Arab state) and at times in ancient history, versions of a "Jewish state" have existed.


 * In addition, people claiming a food belongs to certain Arab nation must keep in mind that the Arab nations have only existed in their present form about as long as Israel. Previously they were part of the British Mandate and before that the Ottoman Empire - thus the food cannot be attributed to them either.  AND -- Who is to say Jews of antiquity didn't have any hand in the development of foods and cuisines in the middle east? In fact, until the creation of Israel, the Jewish population of the middle east was spread out across all areas of that region -- not just the land of Palestine (and in fact, Jews still exist in smaller numbers in the Arab states).  It may be unpopular to say, but I'd bet money that the jews of history had a part in creation of "middle eastern" or traditionally "Arab" foods, by virtue of them living side by side with Arabs for centuries.


 * Would someone please tell me, if there exists OBJECTIVE documentation, what is wrong with mentioning a food's form and popularity within the boundaries of a current political entity? --Nsaum75 (talk) 07:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * There isn't. The section "Israeli Falafel Controversy" should be renamed "Falafel in Israel" (I'll do that) and should open with a statement of how popular falafel is in Israel today (I'll put in a bland placeholder statement... someone could find something sourced to replace it) Jd2718 (talk) 14:01, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually I believe that Jews gave many great things to Arabs, including Islam, their most precious gem, which is basically an Arabized form of Judaism. The Jews were great people and I like them.

However, the Israelis didn't give a **** to anybody ... HD86 (talk) 15:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Re: your comment However, the Israelis didn't give a **** to anybody -- really, here are a few of the more recent things the Israelis are responsible for : & perhaps best of all:  -- But, hey! - don't let us burden you with the facts.  Tundrabuggy (talk) 05:19, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Please Get a Wikipedia Arabic admin to fix the misinformation
the article is very biased, and it is understandable after the latest tensions that the food have sparked between Israel and the arab world. I have no issue with Israelis or Jews, if the control the media or the US or whatever other entity or country then BRAVO for them .... this is not the issue. The issue is that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so informations are supposed to be correct, Wikipedia is not a promoting medium ,unfortunetly in this article, it is promoting the idea that Falafel is an isreali or jewish achievement and not a very well known arab and turkish dish , the reason behind such promoting campaign is that the israeli or jewish food shops in the US probably want to make people think that they can only get Falafel in a Jewish fast food store, which is not the case. the Israeli media have even started throwing theories that Falafel is not arabic and other claims like such. the bottom line you need to get an arabic wikipedia admin to resolve the ambiguity after all falafel is an arabic dish !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadday8 (talk • contribs) 2008-12-03T21:38:52


 * Ok, stop. There is no belief in the US that Falafel is an Israeli or Jewish dish.  Anyone who knows what it is should know that it's an arabic dish.  What you're doing with your edit warring is not reclaiming the article from jewish extremists - there's no such claim made anywhere that I can see.  You're using the article to launch an attack on them by creating a pretext that they claim that.
 * This is a false argument. No such claim is made.  Saying that the claim is not true, when it in fact is not made, is racist.
 * Please stop edit warring.
 * (Back to eating my Falafel and Schwerma Wrap lunch, purchased at a (I believe) Jordanian-owned restaraunt in the US...) Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 22:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

there not intension on attacking anyone, and i'm sorry if it was unintentionally done , but as i have mentioned above the dish have sparked international tension, if nobody was claiming the dish was what it was not , such tensions wouldn't have existed in such a subject. the irony of the situation is that i was trying to search what possible ingredients i can add to the falafel that i was making, inorder to modify the taste a bit, when i saw this article :)

Removal of Israel section
There has been no adequate justification for any inclusion of the Israeli section at all - it's argued above that it clearly violates WP:UNDUE, and the inclusion appears to be a clear violation of WP:BATTLE, by trying to drag Wikipedia into an external dispute.

This is not an appropriate use of Wikipedia pages.

I am going to remove the section. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 21:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The Hummus article is already protected in the hope that editors reach a sensible compromise. I've suggested at WT:IPCOLL that people consider the same action here.--Peter cohen (talk) 21:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Accordingly, I've excised the Lebanon and Egypt sections as well. There was no content there and certainly no sources.  The Egypt section didn't even make sense as all it said was that falafel is a plate that Egyptians eat off of daily. L0b0t (talk) 21:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Favism
Sadday8, the link you keep removing is a source for the statement about favism. The article in question is, contrary to your edit summary, very relevant, as it clearly says "favism, an inherited enzymatic deficiency occurring among some Jews--mainly those of Kurdish and Iraqi ancestry, many of whom came to Israel during the mid 1900s--proved potentially lethal, so all falafel makers in Israel ultimately stopped using fava beans, and chickpea falafel became an Israeli dish.". This is not a spam link, but a reprint of content from a book (The Foods of Israel Today, Joan Nathan, Knopf 2001), by the author if the same book (Nathan). Please don't remove this again. NoCal100 (talk) 16:06, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The sentence implies that favaism is the reason chickpea and not fava bean falafel is eaten in Israel today. The implied claim is ridiculous, the source is a recipe web site claiming to be citing a book, which itself is not a genetics or medical book. Palestinians eat chickpea falafel... Jewish immigrants would have encountered no other kind. That would be the first reason we find chickpea falafel in Israel. Jd2718 (talk) 22:21, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

To balance the bias
Falafel is a very well-known Arab recipe, though in recent years, Israeli natinalists and racists seem to have hijacked it, claiming it's Israeli/Jewish, whish is absolutely horrendous owing to no proof, except the widely-propogated bull they are circuilating. I'm currently busy with studies, but when I'm finished I'll try find as much peer-reviewed reliable sources as possible and put an end to this rubbish. In the meantime, to make this article somehwt less ridiculous, I will add the (correct) opposing POV that some believe it's Arab. My source is: http://www.cliffordawright.com/caw/recipes/display/recipe_id/739/

Sorry this is done on the fly, but I highly doubt that's any less reliable - if not actually so much more so, than an Israeli News Agency, who will obviously take on a racist anti-Arab agenda. Pink Princess (talk) 23:58, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * "an Israeli News Agency, who will obviously take on a racist anti-Arab agenda". That, in itself, is a NPOV comment, which you have made.  --Nsaum75 (talk) 03:24, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Israeli sections
The Israeli sections of the article must be removed including the hebrew letters from the beginning and the image from Nazareth "Israel" Falafel is 100% Arab, it comes from Arab countries. Israel and Jews have nothing to do with it. How is it possible that so much info about Israel and Jews are fit into this article when they have zero claim or history to it? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 16:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I've removed the Hebrew. The word is of Arabic origin and therefore that is the only non-English rendition needed. In ther context of the adoption of Middle Eastern food by Zionist settlers, it might be worth mentioning the Lebanese attempt to get the EU to restrict various foodstuffs of Arab origin - I think Falafel was one of those involved. As for the illustration, nost of the people in the picture do not look at all like Ashkhenazi Jews. The caption also implies it is a Palestinian restaurant.--Peter cohen (talk) 19:23, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Of all the citys in the Arab world, why pick Nazarteh which the international community sees as Israel? And also its just a picture from a restaurant, you cant see any falafel in it. Why isnt it enough with the one from Ramallah? --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * This is a re-post of my comment from the Za'atar discussion page, in regards to the similar request Supreme Deliciousness (talk) made there to have all Israeli and Jewish references removed from the Za'atar article. I believe the comment is relevant here as well.
 * The information regarding Israel is from reliable sources and publications. Its inclusion may be challenged, however one of Wikipedia's core tenets is to ensure all articles are written from a neutral point of view, and removal of properly sourced Israeli/Jewish-related information might be viewed as a violation of that tenet. --Nsaum75 (talk) 01:06, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

The picture from Nazarteh shows no falafel in the picture, therfore it is useless and should be removed. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Your original reasoning for wanting the photo removed was that it was a photo taken in "Nazareth, Israel" and that falafel is "100% Arab". It is further stated that "Of all the citys in the Arab world, why pick Nazarteh which the international community sees as Israel?". The author of the photo states, in the photo description, that its a "falafel restaurant". This would seem to make the photo as relevant to the article as a photo of an ice cream parlor is to the article about ice cream or a photo of a Shawarma restaurant/vendor is to the Shawarma article.  Regardless, based on your previous comments (listed above), it seems that your main opposition to the photo isn't really about what the photo shows, but rather that the photo was taken in a Israeli city. --Nsaum75 (talk) 20:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

My opposition to the photo is as I sayed before, why have a picture from a city Israel controls? This is an Arab dish. There are tens of thousands of Arab citys and restaurants, why Nazareth of all of these? Israel has nothing to do with this food. Second, you can not compare the picture to if it was an ice cream parlor becasue if you look at the picture, there is nothing showing it is a falafel restaurant, there are baguetts to the left and it looks like shawerama/kebab, vegetables,7ummos and sauces, but there is no falafel. If it was an ice cream store picture, you would have seen ice creem cones, ice cream, maybe something colorful on the walls etc. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It is clear that falafel has become a national dish in Israel. The article clearly indicates that this is a cultural borrowing (or appropriation), but nonetheless it is a national dish in Israel today. That being said, the photo shows neither falafel nor a sign advertising it; I am removing it. Feel free to substitute a more appropriate photo. Jd2718 (talk) 23:31, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Concur. Supreme Deliciousness - you have displayed an obvious anti-Israeli bias above, and you need to pay more attention to Wikipedia policies such as don't use Wikipedia as a battlefield and articles need to use a neutral point of view.
 * However, the particular point that there are no visual signs of falafel in the particular picture are valid. It may well be a falafel restaraunt, serving them as well as the other food which is in view, but I agree that no falafel in view makes the image somewhat off topic for this article.  Jd2718's removal seems reasonable to me.  Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


 * In an attempt to provide balance, I have added a photo of a falafel restaurant, located in an arab neighborhood, in Haifa. Falafel is clearly visible on the signage, and the signage uses both hebrew and arabic characters --Nsaum75 (talk) 00:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * That's certainly reasonable, thank you. Perhaps a more interesting shot might be eventually found? Jd2718 (talk) 00:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Image
The image here is probably woo non-free, so it should be recreated. If someone can cook up a batch and take a picture that would be great (I can't find any in my local shops)   &mdash; Zeimusu | Talk 03:31, 2005 Feb 13 (UTC)
 * In this case I'll remove the link. When we will have a new picture we can add it again Matteo 14:01, 2005 Mar 9 (UTC)

British English pronunciation
The pronunciation says this is pronounced like "fa-LAH-fel", but I think this is only true in American English. In British English, I have only ever heard people say it as "fa-LAF-el". That said, I have not heard it very often. Could someone who hears it quite a lot (e.g. someone who works in the British falafel industry, if there is such a thing) confirm or deny that this is the case? leevclarke (talk) 16:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Images
There is a new battle over alleged pro-Israel bias with two of the images, the restaurant in Haifa, and the deep fried slices. Personally, I can't see much wrong with the restaurant photo, because it shows that the dish is popular among Arabs and Jews, with the sign over the door being in Arabic and Hebrew. However, I do wonder whether the fried slices need to be described as coming from Tel Aviv. Is this necessary, or could this be omitted?-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 07:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Picture of the restaurant is meaningless, this article is about falafel, not restaurants. And to have two pictures from Israel is excessive about an Arab dish and not neutral. You are right about that the picture of the fried slices does not have to say where the picture is taken. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The slices are a variation of the way falafel is served, that is why it is placed in the section on variations. --Nsaum75 (talk) 07:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The restaurant picture seems to have been added in good faith, and is free from Commons. Fish and chips has way too many photos (just look at it), but it is logical to have at least one photo of a fish and chip shop. Rather than set off more edit warring on this, I've removed the Tel Aviv part from the deep fried caption, since this does seem to be non-essential.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 07:41, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I included the country because I am unaware if they are served in fried sliced form in Arab countries as well, or if this style of falafel is unique to Israel.


 * I also searched the wikipedia commons for a photo of an falafel shop from an Arab country, since there seemed to be an issue with having a photo of one in Israel, however I was unable to find one. --Nsaum75 (talk) 07:38, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Picture from Ramallah is a falafel shop.--Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:51, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The deep fried slices aren't mentioned in the article text. Probably should be, but a source that indicates how widely this style is used would also be useful.--14:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * You could as easily say that using a picture of a restaurant in an Arab neighbourhood is emphasising that it is a dish still associated with Arab culture evenin Israel.--Peter cohen (talk) 14:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * As ever, Wikipedia articles can be influenced by images that are available on Commons. I don't think that this was a deliberate attempt at bias, and the Haifa image shows that the dish has cross-cultural popularity.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 07:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

there be no proof that the jewish slice food be felafel so i remove it. until there be reliable source added that the jews serve a slice type of felafel, then foto cannot be in article. without reliable source how we know it really felafel and not other type chip? nsaum75 repeatedly try to disrupt many arab food article with falsehoods and pro-jewish state bias. he need to be repremanded or block from editing arab articles. it is him who cause these edit war, not anyone else! all be fine until he try to revise history to degrade arab contribution to world cuisine. thank you Ani medjool (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC).


 * Regardless of the perennial Arab/Israeli dispute, the photo of the sliced and fried falafel needs to be mentioned and explained in the article. At the moment it is out on a limb, and unless it can be tied in with something that the article says, it could be removed as non-essential.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 08:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Its a *VARIATION* of falafel I found served in Israel. I tried including that it was served in Israel in the caption (to explain why I was including the photo), but other editors were opposed to it saying "Tel Aviv, Israel" because it mentions a country some people are opposed to. WP:AGF - its falafel, its not a potato chip or corn chip.  We don't question that the oblong things in the Ramallah photo are a) falafel or b) that its inside a falafel shop.  We don't require sourced content to prove that fish and chips photos are fish and chips, even if it may not appear like the fish and chips served at our local pub. Furthermore, whats increasingly worrisome is that an editor keeps making broad statements about "the jews serve..." and "jewish sliced food", when it has nothing to do with Jews -- it has to do with Israel -- a country made up of not just Jews, but Muslims, Christians, Druze etc.  I also feel that being accused of trying spreading "falsehoods", "revise history" and "degrade Arab contributions" is a personal attack -- when all I did was add a photo of some sliced fried falafel I bought in Tel-Aviv.  This is getting ridiculous. --Nsaum75 (talk) 09:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * It was actually invented in Italy, by a chef named Luigi Alfonzo Garbanzo, professionally known as L. Garbanzo. →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 18:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

felafel is arab food not invent by italians or the jews. show me source that say italian invent it. nsaum75 i suggest you cease cry and cease play of traditional "poor me. poor jew" wolf call. nobody listen because they know the jew steal everything from us and rewrite history to degrade arab. i suggest you cease this vandalize of arab food by shoving you pro jew ajenda, which be antiarab by natural and deny culture of arab peoples. Ani medjool (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:40, 30 September 2009 (UTC).
 * Aside from being a hatemonger, the above editor failed to notice that "el garbanzo" is the Spanish term for "chickpea". →Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 01:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If you keep on in this way you will be reported for personal attacks, refusal to assume good faith, and disruptive editing. In addition, your comments about Jews are grossly defamatory. Hertz1888 (talk) 22:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


 * We're having an Israel vs. Arab World fight on a FOOD ARTICLE?? [[Image:Facepalm3.svg|15px]] Facepalm This is about a picture, this is not about nationalist fighting. As the above editor notes, if you continue that way, you're going to find yourself having problems. Tony Fox (arf!) 04:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * This article has at times resembled a rerun of the Six-Day War. In Talk:Falafel/Archive 1 there are similar disputes, including full protection in March 2008 when things got out of hand. For example, the lead does not give the Hebrew for falafel (פלאפל) because it led to WP:NPOV disputes. See the talk page search box for more fun and games on this issue.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 16:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


 * You might be interested in checking out Lame_edit_wars -- scroll down to the "Hummus and friends" section. --Nsaum75 (talk) 20:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Infobox available
Just letting the editors of this article know that there is Template:Infobox Prepared Food available for use in the article. Dual images can be stacked in the infobox and an example is the Paella article. Shine runner  (talk)   10:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

there be no dual image issue because the slice jew felafel not have source to prove it be felafels. Ani medjool (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC).

Infobox added. Thanks for the pointer. L0b0t (talk) 00:01, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Etymology is Coptic
I'm a little surprised at the etymology given for "falafel" from the Arabic "felfel" - pepper does not even feature prominently in the recipe. The etymology is in fact Coptic "Fa-La-Fel" means literally "Of Lots of Beans" (Fa="of", La="lots, many", Fel="beans"). This etymology is a direct hit - no contrived explanations about how it the word may refer to a minor ingredient in the recipe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.95.211.200 (talk) 00:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Do you have references? Meursault2004 (talk) 13:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Falafel chips
Why is there a photo of an obscure, rare variation ("falafel chips"), but this variation is not even mentioned in the text of the article? Please fix this. Badagnani (talk) 05:27, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Please see the above discussion --Nsaum75 (talk) 06:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Since it not mention in ANYWHERE in article and have no source, then it MUST be delete! Ani medjool (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC).

Falafel
Questions: How do you pronounce it? Who invented it? Where is the best Falafel made? A Glass Bubble (talk) 21:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

NPOV
I dispute the neutralness of article because all but 1 photo in article originate in the jewish state; food be arab food and majority of photo should be from arab countrys. yet only one photo come from somewhere other than jewish state. Photo should be changed so arab countrys have majority of photo. Ani medjool (talk) 23:42, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * First, you are incorrect in stating that all but one photo came from Israel. Of the two photos in the infobox: the description for the photo of the guy frying the falafel says it was taken in the West Bank, while the photo of the basket of falafel balls doesn't state where it was taken.  It did, however, originate on French Wikipedia.


 * Secondly, the photo from Haifa shows the name of the falafel business in both Arabic and Hebrew. The photo's upload description, although written in Hebrew, states it is located in "ואדי ניסנאס" -- Wadi Nisnas -- an arab neighborhood in Haifa. I think the photo is a good example of displaying how popular this particular food is, because it shows that this store caters to two groups of people: Arabic speakers and Hebrew speakers.


 * Thirdly, the photo of the unique version of fried falafel slices does not state where it was taken in the article.


 * You have repeatedly attempted to remove photos from this article based upon their having been taken in Israel, each time bringing up a different reason for their removal. You might be interested in reading the article on Policy shopping. --Nsaum75 (talk) 02:27, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Policy shopping is an apt description. Editor A.m.'s hostile attitude (far from neutral) is a matter of record in the "Images" and other sections above.  Falafel is a food enjoyed internationally.  It is a stretch to claim that neutrality demands it be photographed anywhere in particular. Hertz1888 (talk) 05:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I removed your POV which you placed because there were too many pictures of Jew/Israeli falafel. There is nothing POV about the article. If you have a problem with images in this article or others, I suggest you find better ones, and save us from your discriminatory POV. --Shuki (talk) 23:00, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

"Falafel chip" picture
In the Commons, an IP changed the location of the picture to say it was taken in LA, not Israel, and made related changes to the article. None of those changes were sourced.

As a result, User:Ani medjool removed the picture and all mention of the chips due to the fact that the editor who uploaded the picture was "lying" for no reason other than the IP's edits. This is contrary to WP:AGF. Therefore, I have restored the picture and removed the IP's unsourced edits.

Additionally, even if the editor who uploaded the picture did in fact lie about the location it was taken, it does not equate to deleting the content that is related to the picture. Singularity42 (talk) 00:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * My edit & contribution history should speak for itself. But regardless, I'm pretty sure I was in Tel Aviv when I took the photo, unless there is a part of Los Angeles that looks just like the cafe I was in on Shenkin street in TLV. -- nsaum75  ¡שיחת! 03:10, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry if Ani medjool is continuing the reckless editing. Unless an image is proven to be a hoax, there is no reason to remove from any article, especially if there is no overflow. It does not matter if photographed in Israel, the US, or China. Felafel is a food prepared around the world. --Shuki (talk) 22:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually there is a reason in that what we have at the moment constitutes original research. It is also a useless piece of version. Is this sold in one restaurant or many? If many, is it sold just in Tel Aviv? Just in Israel? It needs a reliable source discussing its significance, or it is just a useless. Last time I visited my cousins, they gave me some felafel flavour snacks. If I had taken a photo of them, could I have put it up with a caption saying "as found in a Jewish household in Pinner"? Both so these are just indiscriminate bits of information unless a source has discussed their significance--Peter cohen (talk) 00:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Previously, the photo's agreed upon caption stated it was sliced fried falafel; another editor recently added in the location specifics to the caption and inserted information into the article itself. However this underscores why I choose not to regularly contribute photos I've taken in Israel, like I do with photos I've taken Mexico and the United States -- everything little thing politicized and even a photo of food becomes the subject of controversy. -- nsaum75  ¡שיחת! 01:15, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Peter, I think it would be valid for you to photograph these products and show us different variations of preparing falafel. I had supported removing the attribution to Tel Aviv, but then, as you point out sort of, better to pinpoint this in case it is unique and given the lack of proof of this being widespread. The page is quite small, adding more information to it would be a great help. I think it's absurd for the deletionist anti-Israel crowd to react this way instead of improving the article with 'Arab' references. Check out shwarma. Yumm. --Shuki (talk) 11:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

History of Falafel
Yes, I made the edit I did as I found slante4d editing going in referencing jews as zionist as well as referencing an article that demeans Jewish religion. The history of falafel in political terms could be full of opinions of which I'm all for but the history of falafel as a food then this is no place for such things. I'm hoping that with putting this here that this issue can be resolved between the two of us before going to Resolving Disputes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Klhrevolution (talk • contribs) 01:24, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I don’t understand your point about Zionism. Are you disputing that the early Jewish settlers in Palestine were part of the Zionist movement? And why would this be grounds upon which to remove that reference from the article? And how does the referenced article demean the Jewish religion? Also, Wikipedia operates based on verifiability through the use of reliable sources. Are you arguing that the source is not reliable? -- Irn (talk) 02:26, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

What is the ideal regional balance for the photos of falafel?
Although I disagree with the approaches of Ani medjool and some other editors, I think a few of the points they raised over here were valid. It's true that of the 4 falafel pictures, 3 are from Israel or Palestine and the fourth is not identified by region. These countries are much smaller than their neighbors, who also consider falafel a dietary staple and have their own regional variations on the dish. For example, where is a picture of the Egyptian falafel that is also mentioned in the article? Might it be on Arabic Wikipedia? Also, do Greeks, Armenians and other groups from Southeastern Europe or Western/Central Asia eat falafel? I've seen falafel served as Greek food in the USA, and I know that Armenians make their own version of pita bread. The article does mention some of the regional variation in the way falafel is made, and this section seems to need quite a bit of expansion. I like the way this is done in the article about Döner kebab. Even where falafel isn't a staple, such as in the USA and Europe, people are familiar with the dish and the Doner kebab article has a lot of information about how that dish is served all over the world. -- AFriedman  (talk)  20:41, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * If we were picking just one country to include, it would have to be Egypt as that seems to be where the dish originates. I don't know whether there is any noticeable difference in the colouration of a falafel (or its insides) depending on what pulse it is made from. If there were one, that would be worth recording.--Peter cohen (talk) 21:54, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have looked on the commons in the past and have not found many photos available from other locations, hence why there appears to be a bias towards including Israeli photos. That said, a number of editors have used anti-Jewish sentiment or their dislike of Israel, sometimes under the guise of "good faith", as reasoning to have Israeli photos removed.  This "dispute" has also occured at Hummus and Za'atar, and at one point lead to the creation of an article on Israeli theft of Arab cuisine.  That said, the issue of "photos" is not only limited to those with Israeli origin, as there were attempts to remove photos taken in the United States of food bought at an Arab market, simply because the item photographed had Hebrew lettering on the packaging.  Anyhow, its probably best that any changes be well thought out and brought to consensus before being made.  -- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! &lrm; 00:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm trying to AGF but can't avoid the ongoing bias against Israel on this article/talk and it bordering on discrimination. There is no bias here towards Israeli pictures. The only guideline for including pictures on this or any article is having the best pictures to include that illustrate the article. If better pictures could be found from other countries (or even Israel/Palestinian Authority) than include them, absolutely no one here is preventing that, only people disturbed that Israeli/Palestinian pictures have too much weight here. To complain about the fact that 3/4 pictures from from a small country is absurd. AFriedman, if you can improve the article then do so, but until then you are merely joining the likes of Ani medjool from a more eloquent angle. --Shuki (talk) 19:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


 * To answer AFriedman, though these days falafel is probably found in Greece, it is not really a Greek dish (you can find pizza and hamburgers in Greece, too -- maybe you could say that all three are becoming assimilated as Greek). As for Greek restaurants abroad, I think it falls into the category of "Generic Middle Eastern food for foreigners", like hummus bi tahini, which is even less of a Greek dish.


 * There is a dish called "ρεβυθοκεφτέδες" (chickpea-meat(less)ball) which is eaten on fast-days (and which my parents remember from the German Occupation because there was no meat), but it is not served like falafel (or at least it didn't used to be).


 * Many Armenians from Lebanon will of course include falafel in their cuisine, but again I don't think it's really an "Armenian" dish.


 * About pictures of falafel in this article, I think it would certainly benefit from good photos from other parts of the Levant and especially from Egypt, which everyone seems to agree is its homeland. I agree with Shuki that it's not pro-Israeli bias to include only Israeli pictures if all the good pictures we have are Israeli pictures. Let others bring us better pictures from elsewhere in the region! --macrakis (talk) 21:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

To clarify my position: I don't have a problem with keeping the pictures that exist, if these are really the best photos in Wikimedia Commons and any language. I would also strongly oppose deleting the pictures in the article, especially if they aren't being replaced with other pictures that are better. But I'm hoping people will add more information, including photos, to this article. I'm glad to see that we're moving toward a nice, CIVIL discussion of the topic without "theft" of Wikipedia's resources to push antisemitic points of view. -- AFriedman  (talk)  04:12, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Pictures from Israel
If you take away the infobox, there are only two pictures in the article, both from Israel. This is an Arab middle eastern dish. Two pictures from Israel are to many. At least one of them should be removed from this Arab food article. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Supreme, I don't think anyone disagrees that it is desirable to have more photos of falafel from more places, especially from Egypt (its place of origin). The way to fix that is to find some good pictures (with of course proper copyright etc.) from those regions. Can you supply them? --macrakis (talk) 20:15, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * PS, Is it accurate to call it an "Arab" food? As far as I know, it is not Moroccan or Gulf Arab cuisine -- though no doubt it has spread there by now, as it has spread to Vancouver and Tokyo. Indeed, I would guess (though I don't know for a fact) that it is a more integral part of the Tel Aviv food scene than it is of the Algiers or Sharjah food scene. --macrakis (talk) 20:24, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


 * This has been discussed before here. -- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! &lrm; 20:29, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * After that discussion, another image of falafel from israel was added. I suggest the image from the shop in Israel to be removed since I added another one of a falafel shop. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:39, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It was a compromise image, showing how it appealed to both Arabs and Israelis because the sign was in both arabic and hebrew. The point is, SD, attempting to introduce new images is fine, but you've already stated that your primary motive is the removal of images based on the fact they were taken in Israel and not simply trying to find better images to improve the article. Perhaps we should create an image gallery for multiple images and to help with the layout and flow.  -- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! &lrm; 20:43, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

My only attempt is to improve this article. After that "compromise" image, you added another image from Israel making this Arab food article have two images from Israel. And in my attempt to improve this article, I do believe that having two images from Israel about an Arab dish is to many. Just like if there were two images of Japanese hummus in the hummus article would be to many. And now when there is another photo of a falafel shop, we can remove the shop from Israel since two images of shops are to many, don't you think? No need for a gallery, the article is small. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 20:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The photo I added was sliced falafel, a variation I had not seen often. I'm sure if I was in Syria and saw sliced Falafel, I would take a photo of it too...but...since most Arab countries prohibit people from entering on an Israeli passport...well...I can only take photos where I'm allowed to visit.  Anyhow, you have stated a number of times that your primary interest is removing Israeli related photos and text, so it makes contributions hard to accept under AGF... but I will leave that up to other editors here.  -- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! &lrm; 21:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You did not answer me. The falafel shop in Israel was the "compromise".. then after this you added another one from Israel, and since I have added a second falafel shop, the first one, the "compromise" image can be removed because that would still leave one image from Israel and it is unnecessary to have two shop images. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:38, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

nsaum75, please answer my above post. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought my response adequately answered your question. I question whether your new photo was an attempt to improve the article or just to introduce a photo so the Israeli photo could be removed. Since your argument all along has been that the photos from Israel should be removed, it is hard to accept your new addition as a good faith attempt to improve the article. Had you introduced a new photo without this discussion taking place, the Good Faith would not have been difficult to assume; but since your new photo is soley in response to your  re-introduction of a discussion about wanting the Israeli photos removed, its hard to AGF.  But like I said in my prior response to you, "I will leave that up to other editors here" in regards as how to handle your recent addition.    -- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! &lrm; 20:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

nsaum, none of you edit be good faith because you intention push pro "isreal" pov at expense of arab pov, so you got no right to claim surpreme deliciousness be edit in bad faith because he not. he try to improve article make more balance by remove inappropreate "isreali" bias. Ani medjool (talk) 00:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I remove "Isreal" photo and replace with your photo surpreme deliciousness. Foto of slice felafel should be remove to because it not explain in article and have no source that state what it be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ani medjool (talk • contribs) 23:17, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The article being short is really the fault of the people who edit it. It could really use expansion.  It's only "start" class and more pictures simply means more improvement--the pictures that are there are certainly informative.  I agree with the idea of creating a picture gallery.  Also, falafel might be an "Arab" food, but it's also an "Israeli" food.  It's really associated with the entire Middle East.  Once a food becomes a staple or at least a regular item of someone's diet, it's also part of their cuisine.  For example, popcorn is a quintessential all-American food even though the first people to make it were the Native Americans.  It's also part of Native American cuisine.  There are dishes which are not part of the typical American diet and generally considered Native American, but popcorn's been incorporated into generic American cuisine and is almost universally considered "American."  Even pasta is often served in U.S. diners and is becoming an "American" food, despite its origins in Italy (and ultimately China).  I think the undue focus on whether falafel is "Israeli" is counterproductive, since even falafel pictures taken outside the Middle East belong in the article, and let's counterbalance the Israeli and Palestinian photos by creating content rather than destroying it.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  21:08, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

How about just having pictures of Falafel and not saying where it is from unless something in the article makes specific mention of a certain way of preparing it and a photo shows that?  nableezy  - 00:06, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It still give undue weight to Isreal and violate NPOV to have so much photos from Isreal in article about arab food. Ani medjool (talk) 00:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * How? If it is just a picture of falafel how does it give any weight "to Israel"? I myself dont see the point of either of the images of places where falafel is sold as they dont show the actual falafel. We dont have a picture of Pizza Hut in the pizza article. Just show pictures of falafel and leave the A/I issues completely out of it.  nableezy  - 00:21, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

It's important to show what kinds of venues sell falafel. For example, falafel is often sold at small stands and casual restaurants, and wouldn't usually be found in a very fine restaurant. Hence the photo of the restaurant. Also, falafel has a number of regional variants, to give one reason that the locations of the photos are important to specify. Ani medjool, do you think you could upload photos of the kind of falafel you or people you know like to eat? Are you able to take photos that can be uploaded, and do you know how to put them on Wikipedia? Better still, is there Egyptian-style fava bean falafel where you are, that you can show us? From the information you've given about yourself, it seems to me that falafel is your food too. If you really have a problem with WP:UNDUE, this is where there's consensus to change the article. Perhaps we'll agree to remove some of the pictures if more are uploaded. -- AFriedman  (talk)  04:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * There doesn't seem to be any standard or MOS regarding categories. Popular foods like French fries include a number of individual cuisine categories as well as the category "world cuisine". But then Potato chip steers clear of all nationalistic and regional categories.  Falafel (and hummus) have both become very popular outside of their historical "homes", and have been adopted by a number of cultures, not just the Israelis.  The Americans have seemly adopted it as a high-protein "health food", and when I was in the States last month I visited a deli that mixed shredded carrots into the falafel dough, and served the balls with a side of ranch dressing "dipping" sauce.  In Mexico I've had falafel served served in a pita that was drizzled honey and chile powder.  Nowhere in the Levant/Middle East would you find falafel served that way...and I have never seen "ranch" dressing outside of the United States.
 * Anyhow, I'm going to go with Nableezy here and say that not every single photo needs to say where it was taken, unless its specific to that style. Since the addition or removal of photos is a "touchy" subject, perhaps a small gallery would be a good way to ensure that the more popular photos from both "sides" are represented and included. I know galleries can be sometimes detracting, but if done properly, perhaps it can help put to rest this ongoing dispute over photos. -- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! &lrm; 04:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * There is an MOS standard about not over-categorising. Over at Hummus a number of us have been quite strict at keeping out any category that names a country. Overe here, I would want to make an exception for Egypt, as we seem agreed that is the place of origin, and then probably keep the rest out because that would make the category section rather large.


 * On pictures, my view is still that pictures should illustrate what is said in reliably sourced text. A food magazine article that looks at variations between countries would allow us to know whether the deep fried slices are peculiarly Israeli and would source stuff about the use of local sources by Americans, Mexicans etc. Otherwise the information contained in the pictures is just anecdotal and constitutes original research.--Peter cohen (talk) 17:03, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Peter cohen i say since first day this photo appear it need be have reliable source that say it be felafel. without source photo could be anything and there fore it make photo without purpose. unless source can be provide that say slice felafel be serve in Jaffa then photo must be remove because it be origin research provide by editor with clear isreali bias Ani medjool (talk) 00:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually it's from Tel Aviv, not Yafo :) Pleasure as always. Breein1007 (talk) 00:35, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Regard less, issue need be resolve, which be removal of photo from haifa. It unecessary to have two photo of same thing, especially when new photo be more superior than haifa photo. Ani medjool (talk) 00:31, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed, If no one can give an intelligent reply for why there must be two images of shops in the article or why there must be two pictures from Israel about an Arab dish, the Haifa picture should be removed. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 10:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, can you say your introduction of the new photo was done with the sole intent to improving Wikipedia and and had nothing to do with your previous comments about wanting to remove photos based on the fact that they were Israel? Because, with topic threads like this and this you seem to be "fishing" for ways to force the removal of content you find disagreeable.  -- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! &lrm; 11:24, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Regard more, we no remove photo from haifa because it no be less superior than new photo. Me thinks haifa photo more better than new photo. Walla ishi. :) Breein1007 (talk) 03:20, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Breein and explained my rationale in a recent edit summary to the main article. Nsaum, I don't think it's fair to Supreme Deliciousness to ask questions about his intent when he introduced the very nice new photo of the falafel restaurant in Utrecht. Supreme deliciousness and Ani medjool, as per the previous Talk page posts I think it's extremely unlikely that there'll be consensus to remove photos from this article at this point. You've made your arguments and some were accepted--please stop before your editing becomes disruptive. I can't tour the Middle East to take falafel photos, but in real life I'm trying to organize events that would involve taking pictures of falafel in the USA. Does anyone know of an extremely authentic Egyptian restaurant in the New York City or Boston area that serves falafel made with fava beans? -- AFriedman  (talk)  16:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * There was never any consensus for adding of two pictures from Israel into this arab food article, and consensus is not reached by the number of votes, but by intelligent posts. And so far no one has replied to my questions about that image. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 19:40, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * This is as much an Israeli food article as it is an Arab food article. Check the categories. Therefore, I suggest you find something more constructive to do with your time. We wouldn't want to seem like we are editing articles with anti-Israel motives, right? :) Breein1007 (talk) 19:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Since no one seem be able to give reason for why two photo of felafel shop belong in article, other than hurl accusation and accuse other editor of poor faith, I be bold and remove extra photo of felafel shop. New photo be better because it be in english and this be english wikipedia and be cause it be in land out side of arab world. Please no add photo of haifa felafel shop back unless you can provide good rational for there be two photo of felafel shop in this article or why haifa be supremely better than europe photo. Ani medjool (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:14, 1 February 2010 (UTC).
 * Fairness is fairness. He insisted I respond to his question, so I answered and asked him a question in return. I appreciate the new photo, I just wanted to make sure I understood clearly his reasoning for the new photo -- given that he has been so adamant that Israeli photos be removed and demanded that the one in Haifa be removed since he added a new one. Anyhow the Lower East Side has several restaurants that serve Falafel -- at least they did when I was there last May. Cheers! -- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! &lrm; 19:35, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Falafel is a hugely important/popular Israeli dish (arguably the most popular?), it's no surprise Israelis are major editors of this article. The Arab/Israeli conflict reaching absurd levels over here. Masterhomer 21:47, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I have reverted this edit by Supreme Deliciousness, as there is still appears to be no consensus on the merit of having Israeli photos in this article. -- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! &lrm; 08:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I have lost count on how many times I have asked people at this talkapge to give any reason for why there should be two pictures from Israel about Arab dish or why there should be two pictures of shops. There was never any consensus for adding two pictures from Israel, so when I remove it, I am following what has happened on the talkpage. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 08:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * SD, editors have answered you and presented possible solutions (galleries etc). However every time someone gives you an answer you disagree with, you appear to ignore it or try to achieve the desired result (e.g. the removal of photos taken in Israel) from another position. No clear consensus has yet been reached on the photos.  When any editor gives the appearance of WP:Wikilawyering or say they are going to search for new photos specifically so the Israeli photos have to be removed, it often is counter productive to furthering discussion. -- nsaum75 ¡שיחת! &lrm; 08:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Edit summary from that edit: "As talkpage, no reason given by anyone to have 2 pictures from Israel or how it is appropriate for it to be 2 pictures from Israel about Arab dish." It seems to me the burden is to show how it is inappropriate, and that criterion has not been met, nor is likely to be.  It is increasingly hard to see the rush to remove the photo by certain editors as solely and impartially related to improving the article. Hertz1888 (talk) 09:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The picture removed by SD and restored by Nsaum is the only picture of a shop that is representative of where falafel is typically sold. The shop in Utrecht is representative of the fact that many people worldwide enjoy falafel, but the picture that was removed and restored illustrates the following additional information: (1) a location where falafel is a dietary staple, (2) 2 languages whose speakers consider falafel a dietary staple. SD and Ani medjool, your main arguments to remove the picture are that the article gives undue weight to Israeli falafel. Since our goal is to have articles which are informative, WP:UNDUE is normally corrected by adding content rather than removing it. An article that is WP:UNDUE is certainly preferable to an article that would contain less relevant information. SD, please do not remove information unless there is consensus to remove it. Otherwise you are sliding into edit warring and even vandalism.

I understand that this issue is emotionally charged for many of you. I think it might be more constructive to confront the real issue, and talk on WP about how Israel has affected your life and the lives of people you know. Then we can address the real issues instead of this inappropriate substitute. -- AFriedman  (talk)  15:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Afriedman, you ask how "Israel" affect life of me and people I know. Well for begin, the "Israel" military have slaughtered thousand of poor defense less palestinian. But this not for discuss here on Felafel talk page. Only felafel discuss belong here, so please not change topic. But We need discuss the blatant push of "Isreal" POV by nsaum and other editors into article about food that be arab food. How wood you view article about the jew food matzo ball if all photo were from arab or muslim country and none from jews or "Israel"? Wood you think this be balance? Ani medjool (talk) 23:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I have posted some general questions for Ani medjool, re: ideas about how to improve the Palestinian political situation, on his talk page.


 * About the article, I've changed the tag to try and more specifically address his criticisms. We don't have any good replacements for the Israeli and Palestinian photos yet.  Ani medjool, I'm glad you tagged the article instead of removing pictures.  Tagging was a good idea.  And I think we agree about the photos--someone needs to find more pictures from other countries, but in the meantime, the pictures should remain as they are.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  05:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I add back neutrality tag because that issue not been address yet. Your tag address topic of it be too much information on one entity, but it no address neutrality of have information from entity in general in regard to this be arab food. Ani medjool (talk) 22:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I have restored the "Israeli food" category. A majority of people would consider falafel an Israeli food, even if a minority of this article's editors would not.  I don't think it's appropriate to delete categories against majority opinion.  Ani medjool, if you don't consider falafel an Israeli food, what would you think of as an Israeli food :)?  FYI, only about a third of Israel's population is of European extraction, but a solid majority comes from various parts of the Middle East.  Those people are not only the Israeli Arabs, but also Israel's Sephardic Jews and Mizrachi Jews.  BTW, if your opinion is representative of a significant minority (and the NY Times reference you added certainly seems to support that), perhaps an expanded section on the controversy over whether falafel can legitimately be called "Israeli" might address the neutrality issue.  -- AFriedman   (talk)  00:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Long stand consensus exist on this article and on article Hummus and Za'atar that no national category belong. I suggest you remove. Ani medjool (talk) 00:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * This is ridiculous . A Google book search shows multiple sources relating the food to Israel. If anything, it isn't spelled out clearly enough in the article. It has been severed at state dinners and grew into fast food drawing parallels with McDonald's. Not using an appropriate see also or category (navigational not a label) appears to show the resentment the sources mention.Cptnono (talk) 00:14, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Here I agree with Ani Medjool. Indeed I posted this the other day to try to get it explicitly enshrined into policy.--Peter cohen (talk) 00:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Cptnono i reference navigational category, not See Also category. If you want change long stand consensus here and at Hummus and Za'atar about include of national navigational category, then be guest of me. But i think you find that many other editor agree with me. Ani medjool (talk) 00:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I misread the dispute and jumped to inclusions. With the categories, many individual Arab countries have subcategories at the Arab Cuisine category. It seems inappropriate to not have Israel mentioned. Keeping it in the see also as a wikilink somewhere else makes it less of concern.
 * The other articles mentioned are not of high quality on the assessment scale and have different variables so I don't care much for that consensus impacting this article.
 * As a disclaimer, I personally like the navigational aspect and tend to lean towards over categorization with all articles so I might add too many if it were up to me.Cptnono (talk) 00:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Follow-up: Would Category:Middle Eastern cuisine work instead of Arab Cuisine? Arab Cuisine and several national cuisines (including Egypt and Israel) are sub categories of it. It also takes away the whole Arab not Arab thing that sometimes pops up with the region.Cptnono (talk) 01:43, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

No because not all middle east country be arab country. So it must be arab cuisine. I add new and better photo of felafel restaurants and of cooking felafel from arab countries. However question still unresolve about "felafel chip" photo cuz no source provide for it in article, so it need be remove unless nsaum or other editor can provide relevant source for it deem mention in article. Ani medjool (talk) 00:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Not all Egyptians, Israelis, and Lebanese are Arab. Middle East summarizes it best.Cptnono (talk) 00:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)