Talk:Gochujang

"History" section
To summarize: this section is POV pushing, reads like a diatribe not an encyclopedia article, and cites self-published sources to make its core argument ("gochutruth.wordpress.com"). I see the content was removed once and this was reverted. I am proposing that it be removed again. We must follow the consensus of reliable sources, not cobble together an argument from tangentially related research and nationalist blogs. 20:29, 23 May 2024 (UTC)


 * The Horticulture Journal should is not likely an unreliable ad nationalistic source with all Japanese authors publishing a peer reviewed work theorizing that in the 16th century Japan obtained chili pepper from Korea. The Japanese are claiming the opposite based on their own historical documents that Korean gochu pepper existed before the 16th century since Goryeo (Korai) times.  Why would Japanese make such a claim which is based on their own historical texts and how is this nationalisitic?  Oddly, Japanese research then becomes tangential research simply because it goes against the insistence of Columbian Exchange Theory imposed on Korean cuisine.  Then strange claims arise that gochujang must be made with black pepper despite no such thing exists in Korean cuisine, a claim that was left unchallenged.  For example, the Jibyeongyuseol is mentioned but the exact quote is never provided is left unchallenged, but when the actual quote is provided (from an English language blog and the Korean article to blog duly referenced)  nammancho "southern barbarian pepper" that Koreans considered poisonous raises questions.  The blogs referenced have English translations are included for further explanations for non-Korean speakers, but perhaps not essential with AI translators available.  The Columbian Exchange Theory seems to be unilaterally applied to Asia after successfully applied to Europe.  Yet any attempt to bring up evidence demonstrating the misapplications is taken a nationalistic.  Writing in an encylopedic manner will be a skill one has to develop and patience is needed for beginners to practice while attempting to make earnest constributions in the communal spirit of Wikipedia as a knowledge base that evolves as new evidence corrects misconceptions.   The Columbian Exchange Theory is not set in stone.  Please search for an NPR 2013 article "How The Sweet Potato Crossed The Pacific Way Before The Europeans Did" NPR January 23, 2013 to see how the potato crossed the Pacific Ocean. JakHoDo (talk) 22:29, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * This history section is the equivalent of the "Earth" page having it's size and shape section devoted to flat-earth theory. The entire history section here should be deleted. The issue I'm guessing is that the original author is going to revert, and is clearly not amenable to reason. I'm not into Wikipedia editing, but I just want to encourage you to go ahead and delete if you have a solution. 202.58.131.46 (talk) 23:12, 23 May 2024 (UTC)