Talk:Hainanese chicken rice

level 5 vital article
let's discuss. —valereee (talk) 22:30, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I was just doing maintenance work adding VA Templates on VA articles not having them. I was directed via VA Report and checked validity on WP:Vital articles/Level/5/Everyday life where this article seems to be have placed for a while.
 * In case you are interested in VA article list, I need help on a matter requiring experienced editor/admin experience. Kindly refer to my report on WP:ANI ::Roller26 (talk) 09:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , I'm not really interested in the VA article list, although I am very surprised that anyone would consider any single specific dish to be a vital article! I can see an entire category of dish, like "fried chicken", but Hainanese chicken rice is just so specific. Maybe they're including all dishes that are some country's national dish? At any rate, if that's what the good folks at VA lists have decided, fine by me, and sorry to trouble you. :) I don't know what that Saturdayopen is doing, but they seem to be well-intentioned. I've left a message at their talk asking them to start using edit summaries; between that, your warnings, and ANI, we should get their attention. A lot of very new users don't understand why edit summaries are so important. —valereee (talk) 10:10, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

IP edits
Hey, IP! Not sure what you intend by this edit, can you explain? —valereee (talk) 01:47, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
 * nasi ayam in Malaysia is a synonym for nasi lemak (as well as a sort of rice that includes a chicken drumstick) not Hainanese chicken rice. They are entirely different dishes. 104.244.208.228 (talk) 20:32, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I think this is a continuation, what are you saying "totally different dishes" etc.? Special:Diff/1005066542 —valereee (talk) 20:51, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Thailand - "chicken blood tofu"
"Chicken blood tofu" is mentioned in the Thailand section, and linked to pork blood curd, which says nothing at all about chicken blood. --142.163.195.153 (talk) 15:54, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * You can edit the article, you know? – robertsky (talk) 16:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Country of origin
I believe the country of origin for Hainanese Chicken rice should be limited to Singapore only. There are various sources that state that Mr Wang Yiyuan first sold chicken rice as a street hawker during the 1920s, the National Museum of Singapore had also done a Food Gallery in 2014 explaining the origin of this dish to visitors in 2014.12

Nam Heong Chicken Rice in Malaysia as cited by SCMP in this source 3, had differing information on when the restaurant first started selling chicken rice. As seen here most information found states that the brand first started selling it in 1938. 4567. All these are Malaysian sources. -- Deoma 12 (Talk) 19:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * From what I can tell, the inclusion of "Malaysia" as the dish origin could not be verifiable. I'm aware that Wikipedia requires strict verifiability.


 * Looking into the SCMP source, the Malaysian claim was pretty much made by Malaysians themselves, and as you mentioned, all of which could not be verified as they are highly contradictory. On the other hand, we have many examples of food critics and travel documentations not from either country crediting Singapore for the dish origin, which additionally are also backed by numerous reliably verified sources (e.g. the creator, Wang Yiyuan).


 * Also, it seems that Malaysian politicians love bringing up Singaporean culinary foods on purpose to muddy the waters over their origins, and it should come as no surprise that these tend to happen whenever relations between the two are strained, as we can see in the "Controversy over origin" subsection. It's frankly undiplomatic and just one of the many examples of a larger country bullying a smaller one.


 * Off topic, I can't wait to visit someday to try out this dish. :-) NunoSantosAR (talk) 18:17, 26 September 2021 (UTC)


 * How do you propose we proceed from here? As listing Malaysia as one of the places of orgin would not really be factually correct. I have been trying to factually list the places of origin correctly for various dishes from Singapore but after a while most of these edits gets undone and completely deleted. Similarly on the Chinese Wikipedia (Chinese version of Bak kut teh), many unreigstered editors just removes the citation or content completely, its like they are indenial.


 * I do you hope you'd get a chance to visit after this whole COVID pandemic! Would be glad to welcome you to SG! In the mean time stay safe! -- Deoma 12 (Talk) 19:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)


 * The SCMP post discusses explicitly the differing claims behind the dish, as well as the possibility similar derivations of the same Chinese dish emerged in different areas. Synthesising the various sources here to make new determinations as done above is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Casting national claims back before the countries existed is a bit anachronistic as well. CMD (talk) 02:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes it does, but however, it also cites that Nam Heong Chicken Rice in Malaysia was established in the 1920s, while other sources about the brand puts its establishment at 1938. I'm just questioning the reliability of the SCMP article as a source for putting the country of origin as Malaysia & Singapore. There were other information and sources putting the country of origin of the dish as Singapore. If it is anachronistic, then why do the article on Nasi lemak cites Malaysia as the place of origin, when in fact it did not exist as a country until 1957? And the name Malaysia was only used officially in 1963 after merger with other British territories in the region. Just want to clear up these questions regarding the place of origin information and how it should be written. -- Deoma 12 (Talk) 03:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * It's certainly true that these tend to be WP:DISINFOBOXes which don't handle really dishes which are quite basic, often informal, and older than the countries in question. The best path forward is to be braod and non-specific in tricky infobox areas, and put the detailed information you've found into the relevant body section. CMD (talk) 03:35, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Maybe a clean up on articles revolving around Malaysian and Singaporean dishes would be great to have, so as to not confuse readers. Regarding the sources cited, it would more reliable to cross check with a few credible sources (UBO) as articles such as the SCMP one in question proved that a single credible source might also be inaccurate and misinformed. -- Deoma 12 (Talk) 06:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I suppose readers would be generally helped if sources like the SCMP one were used throughout to explain the link to gastronationalism. Using multiple sources is fine, but sources saying something happened in Malaysia, or something happened in Singapore, are not sources saying something did not happen in the other place. Nor is cross-checking the same as deriving new information by combining sources. CMD (talk) 07:01, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes, that would be better utilised there, rather than citing it as a source for the place of origin. I think you misunderstood my intention, what I am pushing for is that rather than citing a misinformed source, maybe it could be replaced with one that is more factually correct, if not it wouldn't be reliable if it was providing the wrong information. Multiple sources have already been cited in the article placing the earliest known variant of the dish to have been created or adapted in Singapore since the 1920s to 1940s, which would be more factually correct. Thus, my first suggestion was just to place Singapore as the place of origin. But if that is not possible, then I would suggest that the infobox place the dish place of origin to Southeast Asia and detail the origin story of the dish in each country (Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam) within the article itself, as this dish is a adapted variant of the Wenchang chicken from China. Maybe that would provide a more neutral and less nationalistic approach? -- Deoma 12 (Talk) 07:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Generalising seems good, it's somewhat of a thankless task to try and find a specific location for a food which has lots of variations and is in turn a variation on another type of food. Presumably every Hainanese emigrant who could cook would've had a chance. Malay Peninsula would be a bit tighter than Southeast Asia, but that doesn't seem too important if the body detail is good. I am no convinced the SCMP source is particularly misinformed, there's every chance the author simply encountered a different standard for what qualifies as Hainanese chicken rice. CMD (talk) 07:58, 27 September 2021 (UTC)


 * I think it would be good to put Southeast Asia, as Malay Peninsula does not include Singapore, which might raise some eyebrows. -- Deoma 12 (Talk) 02:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 June 2022
Include Thailand in "culinary staple" sentence. You can see in the Thailand variation section that it is also popular in Thailand, too, as khao man gai. Honestly I don't understand why Indonesia is in the sentence but not Thailand when clearly the dish is more prominent the other way around. 49.228.166.231 (talk) 09:08, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. CMD (talk) 09:23, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Translation of name in thai.
the translation from the thai name to english is wrong. It is as written khao man gai. But literally it means: rice fat chicken. Khao in this sentence means rice, man means fat, and kai is chicken. Chromalux (talk) 12:04, 29 October 2023 (UTC)