Talk:Hainanese chicken rice/Archive 1

Straw polls
The thing about the straw polls, is there a reference for that (to strengthen the article)? -- Natalinasmpf 10:54, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It was conducted by the Straits Times quite a while back....so it will take some time to find it again! :D--Huaiwei 13:11, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * If you got a copy of the ST yesterday, the national dish aurvey was mentioned again in the NDP special! ;)--Huaiwei 07:18, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Straits Times said that Hainanese Chicken Rice is the National Dish of Singapore... If you don't believe me you can do a Google Search on "Singapore's National Dish" and the Straits Times Online comes up first.  =P Deon 17:18, 21 Nov 2005 (UTC)

Free advertising
What's with the free advertising of stores here? Idiot.

123.136.64.13 (talk) 09:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Regional variations
Is it originally a Li ethnic dish rather than Han Chinese？ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.99.171 (talk) 04:34, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Additional names
Should the Malaysian and Min Nan names be added? Badagnani 19:03, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The Malay name currently in the article ("nasi ayam") is misleading. It actually refers to any chicken rice, e.g. Malay-style chicken rice, which probably has nothing to do with Hainanese chicken rice. Hainanese chicken rice in Malaysia certainly could be found with roasted chicken, which also happens to be the case for Malay-style chicken rice, but this should not be taken as indication that they are related in any way. Teoh Han Hui (talk) 22:43, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

making the family dinner
to make the family dinner you have to get two bowls and put cupcake

mix in it.then add rice and then you put it in a pot and let it

cook for 15 minutes then after that you turn off the fire and

switch the sides like if you have the pot on the left side of the

stove put it to the right side of the stove and let it cool off for

about 20 minutes and then you can sevre the plate to your family

and enjoy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.229.138 (talk) 00:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Weasel words?
"According to some, the current most popular hawker nearby is in the Coffee Shop named 'Good Tea'"- I think that's a little ambiguous. 69.129.184.243 (talk) 10:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Chicken rice ball page merge
I totally agree. That page is a small paragraph. Plus, the recipe is just a variation of Hainanese chicken rice.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:43, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problem
This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:29, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not seeing the offending text anywhere else. I've google various strings and only see it here, (except for mirror sites, obviously). Can somebody else please have a quick look to verify this and then we can restore the text. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:57, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * It's probably a translation copyright violation which is why it isn't popping up in English language searches. The editor in question was found to have contributed large-scale copyright violations, many of which were translations from Malay or Chinese. Under copyright policy, additions by such editors can (and should) be presumptively removed. --Mkativerata (talk) 00:44, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Boiling?
The text of the article states that the chicken is boiled in water. That isn't my understanding: the water should not boil, just be warm enough (but below 100°) to cook the chicken. Does anybody have an opinion on that? Groogle (talk) 01:10, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

CNN 50 top foods article
Why is Wikipedia full of these references to a clickbait article on CNN?149.241.190.217 (talk) 14:15, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Hainanese chicken rice in the Philippines?
I'm a Filipino and Hainanese chicken rice isn't well known in the Philippines. The image shown on the page that shows Philippine "version" of Hainanese chicken rice comes from a restaurant.

In my opinion, the Philippine entry should be deleted. OnesimusUnbound (talk) 05:17, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation backlinks
Valoem left this in my Talk page, and I think the discussion is better here. Mockingbus (talk) 04:35, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi,


 * I noticed that you were removing a template on arroz con pollo and Hainanese Chicken Rice. The halal guys, arroz con pollo, and hainanese chicken rice are all commonly refered to as chicken and rice. A google search will confirm it. Prior to me making a disambiguation for chicken and rice it redirected to arroz con pollo so there was reason for me to add the double redirect to the halal guys and the other chicken dish on top. Now that the disambiguation page has been made I have no problem removing halal guys and the other chicken and rice from both pages. However, because all three are still commonly referred to as chicken and rice a template link on top to the disambiguation page is appropriate. I hoped to have cleared things up. Cheers! Valoem   talk  01:10, 2 March 2014 (UTC)


 * While I can't speak to the Halal Guys food cart, "Google will confirm it" because these are popular ways to prepare and serve two of the most common ingredients in the entire human food experience. The backlink might make sense with "arroz con pollo" is might make sense on es.wikipedia.org, since "arroz con pollo" is literally Spanish for "rice with chicken", but here on the English wiki, this makes about as much sense as insisting that Kielbasa, Chorizo, and Lap cheung all backlink to "Sausage", or that spaghetti bolognese and Hiyashi_chūka both backlink to a disambiguation page for "noodles and sauce". A lot of the subpages in Fried noodles would be the same - note that "chow mein", "chow fun", "yaki udon" and "yaki soba" all translate literally to "fried noodles". It's completely excessive and unnecessary to have the callback at the top of the page; an inclusion in the "See also" is more than sufficient. Mockingbus (talk) 04:35, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


 * To suggest that those articles do not have disambiguation pages as a precedence is an improper argument. A discussion needs to be made to determine precedence. Disambiguation pages are made for the purpose of multiple meanings. The primary result from a google search will direct to hainanese chicken rice which is my point yet chicken and rice can refer to multiple articles there for the disambiguation page and the about template is proper. My comment regarding a possible edit war is an attempt to avoid such occurrences. Valoem   talk  06:16, 9 March 2014 (UTC)


 * "Let's not get into an edit war, as long as my edit comes out on top," right? Smooth move, making that comment right before doing a reversion. I'm not arguing to remove the backlink just because of "precedence"; I'm trying to demonstrate that it's unnecessary linking for the sake of linking and introduces confusion rather than making any meaningful clarification. Let's call for a third opinion to settle this. Mockingbus (talk) 18:34, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


 * The guideline on hatnotes (specifically WP:NAMB) would suggest that a disambiguating hatnote is not required in this case. According to the guideline, "Hatnotes help readers locate a different article they might be seeking." Since neither Chicken rice nor Chicken and rice redirects here, users looking for other dishes are unlikely to end up here using Wikipedia's search box. --Paul_012 (talk) 10:20, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Disruptive Editing by Limjanzen
Limjanzen (talk) is behaving like an WP:SPA with an apparent nationalistic agenda as the account is being used to misrepresent regional foods as being purely of Malaysian origin, without giving sources to justify the edits, or skewing them towards Malaysia [][][]. Its even to the extent that the editor was removing references that showed the foods had shared origins, such as the removal of this source from the Malaysian Tourism board.[]. I've tried to communicate to the editor about this behaviour without any improvement in the situation. Zhanzhao (talk) 23:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hainanese chicken rice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110831041040/http://crosscut.com/2010/03/18/food/19683/Singapore-s-national-dish%3A-Hainan-chicken-rice/ to http://crosscut.com/2010/03/18/food/19683/Singapore-s-national-dish%3A-Hainan-chicken-rice/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:32, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Origin
Now it is Singapore again, supported by an interesting source. Thoughts? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:00, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
 * There is no strong evidence its from Singapore. Every countries in Southeast Asia has Hainanese chicken rise. Quotation from the current reference, 'This is (probably) the dish that evolved into the Hainanese chicken rice in Singapore'. Probably? So,this is not academic source. Even that writer dont know where is come from.
 * Agreed! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018 discussion
The last stable version has the rather safe and neutral Southeast Asia. An IP keeps changing it to Singapore. That is not sourced and should be reverted. I do not wish to edit war. Please, somebody else revert.

Now, what should it be? I think Southeast Asia is fine unless someone can provide good sources saying otherwise. So, below, please state your preference (and rationale if you can/wish):


 * Southeast Asia - for reasons stated above. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:05, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Ugh, this IP probably doesn't even know what a talk page is yet. They probably aren't seeing our edit summaries asking them to come to the talk page. valereee (talk) 23:46, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Then a situation of WP:CIR?--Mr Fink (talk) 23:49, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, sure, but look at their contributions. They're literally brand new. They don't know competence is required, lol valereee (talk) 23:50, 10 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Okay, I changed the note they'd put into the infobox, maybe they'll see that valereee (talk) 00:01, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The IP's incessant insistence on writing edit summaries that declare its supreme and supremely unquestionable ownership of the page strongly suggests the IP is making a point to not see it.--Mr Fink (talk) 00:14, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, and quite honestly, someone who knows how to insert markup should know enough to poke around a bit. Maybe the block will give them the motivation to do that. valereee (talk) 00:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hopefully, yes.--Mr Fink (talk) 00:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Not CIR. I posted at his talk. If he can write that edit summary, then he can also understand the posts. This was just a case of trying to force things one way. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:05, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Chinese immigrants to where?
Into Singapore, I assume? But I'm not actually sure from reading the lead. Since it's the lead sentence, maybe we clarify? valereee (talk) 11:15, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Major changes
I've gone through and checked as many references as I could and have trimmed the article to what is supported by those references, searched for new references and expanded based on new ones I found. Instead of Singapore going into regional variations, I used it as the default since literally EVERY source gave that to Singapore. It's clearly important in Malaysia -- although I have some question whether the Malay version is MUCH more general, just "chicken rice" rather than "Hainanese chicken rice" -- but no reliable sources are calling it a national dish. Closest is 'culinary staple.' And while I'm sure there are restaurants serving it in Cambodia and Indonesia, I found nothing other than recipes and restaurant listings. So please if you're going to try to argue about Malaysia, let's talk first. Ditto Indonesia and Cambodia, found nothing other than recipes on blogs. I'm afraid I can't assess the Thai sources as the translations are difficult to understand, but many of them appear to be blogs. If someone who reads Thai could asses, that would be good.

If anyone would like to make changes, I'd appreciate discussing here first as we've had many many unsourced assertions inserted over the past several years. valereee (talk) 17:29, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Looking at the lead, "It was created by immigrants to Singapore from Hainan province in southern China" seems rather one-dimensional and oversimplified. Likewise, the history section fails to present a coherent narrative of how the dish's evolution (understandable, given the lack of authoritative sources). That the Singaporean/Malaysian version (don't forget that both used to be part of British Malaya, so the distinction might not have meant much) was developed by immigrants from Hainan is clear enough. But what about the other versions? Were they spread secondarily from there, or did they come directly from Hainan?


 * In Thailand at least, general consensus seems to be that the dish was developed by Hainanese immigrants pretty much independently of the Singaporean/Malaysian version. (The founder of the now-famous Go-Ang Kaomunkai Pratunam, for example, moved to Bangkok from Hainan in 1957.) This culture column from the Manager newspaper's website notes that most Thai versions of the dish are distinguished by their insistence on capon (castrated cockerels) meat as the main ingredient. The sauce is also very different from the Singaporean version. For an English-language source, there's this article from the Bangkok Post, which covers the same ground and a bit more.


 * I haven't looked into details about other countries' versions, but it's likely that the dish has also had other parallel developments. This San Francisco Chronicle article says, "Where it appears, the dish maps 150 years’ immigration from China’s Hainan Island, located east of northern Vietnam, to Singapore and Malaysia, where the dish is often known as Hainan chicken rice; to Vietnam, where it is called “Hai Nam chicken”; and to Thailand, where it has been renamed “khao man gai” (“fatty rice chicken”)." The history section should ideally present an overview of the dish's development and spread, first from Hainan to Southeast Asia in the early 20th century, then from Singapore to becoming globally known. It's clear enough that the dish is considered national dish in Singapore. But the eight citations following that sentence is a classic example of WP:Citation overkill. Enough has also been written about the petty fights between Malaysia and Singapore that it could be covered with more context. --Paul_012 (talk) 22:07, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Paul 012, those additions sound great, go for it! Or I'm happy to continue working on it with them.


 * The citation overkill is solely due to the fact for years IPs have kept coming in and insisting without sourcing that the dish is a national dish of Malaysia as well as Singapore, which I suspect is not unrelated to the 2009 statement by the Minister of Tourism. Once the article is stable I have ZERO objection to trimming them down to maybe three and placing the rest here on the talk page. valereee (talk) 22:31, 13 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I don't quite have the time to work on the article just yet; please go ahead if you'd like. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:29, 14 January 2019 (UTC)


 * For the Vietnamese version, you can find it at some Vietnamese restaurants in the U.S., but I never tried the dish when I visited Vietnam. Unfortunately, I do not speak Vietnamese, so if someone could translate this video, it would be great. It appears to show a shop in Ho Chi Minh City selling the Vietnamese version of the dish. However, this is complicated by the fact that, there are also many shops in Ho Chi Minh City selling what they claim is the Singaporean version of Hainanese chicken rice, and many of these were opened quite recently by Singaporean immigrants. In any case, could anyone who understands Vietnamese please look at the sources in Vietnamese for the origins of the dish? The dog2 (talk) 19:44, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

removal of sourced content
that material is sourced; why are you removing it? valereee (talk) 16:28, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

edit warring
Stop it now, both of you, and come here to discuss. —valereee (talk) 18:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think anyone was edit warring yet, but the discussion took place on respective user talk pages. I've told that article talk page is the right place for this reason, otherwise no one will know about the discussion. I think he understands now that he has to get consensus for the edits here. Spudlace (talk) 19:07, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! —valereee (talk) 19:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC)