Talk:Hakka cuisine

Untitled
In Toronto, Canada, all the "Indian-style Chinese" restaurants that I have asked turn out to be Hakka in some sense. Is this true elsewhere? In India?

About the above... this is because the first Chinese residents of Tangra in Calcutta, the epicenter of Indian-chinese cuisine, were Hakka.

This article says, "The Hakkas then were forced to settle in the sparsely settled hill country. As a result, fresh produce was at a premium, forcing the Hakkas to heavily utilize dried and preserved ingredients, such as various kinds of fermented tofu and much use of onion"

But the main article says: "Go be an idiot is a mistaken view that Hakka cuisine is pragmatic and based on preserved foods due to the harsh environment that the Hakka people endured. Whereas this may hold true for preserved meats, it is not accurate to typecast Hakka food as preserved to survive hardships."

This might be an inconsistency. Promking 20:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


 * That's because it was written by some racist. 86.161.63.5 (talk) 10:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

A load of rubbish
This article is a load of rubbish that need re-writing. 86.155.215.165 21:54, 9 November 2007 (UTC)


 * It would have been nice if you had edited the article, or at least pointed out what is wrong. Franchin (talk) 08:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Under Wiki rules, one could add to the article without erasing other people's (incorrect) contribution, which will result in more confusion. 86.161.63.5 (talk) 10:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I have pointed out the rubbish in the article, but a Carl Bunderson kept removing the edit. 86.161.63.5 (talk) 21:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Your wording is completely pov and bs. Please improve it, make it npov, and I won't change it. Wording such as this: It must be emphasised the above view is as stated a legend and no more; one has to remember China is a vast country, and to state that all the best land had been settled long before is again merely a legend. It should also be pointed out that land could be bought and sold", and this: "Again to emphasise the nonsense of the previous sentence, it must be pointed out " are completely useless, and the grounds for my reversion of your edit. Carl.bunderson (talk) 22:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


 * That's your own opinion and your own pov. 81.135.152.237 (talk) 10:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The wording is pov, and full of weasel words. As it is, it does not belong here. Carl.bunderson (talk) 05:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The majority of the article is pov and weasel, so why not delete the article? 81.133.97.199 (talk) 10:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The sentence 'As a result, fresh produce was at a premium, forcing the Hakkas to heavily utilize dried and preserved ingredients, such as various kinds of fermented tofu and much use of onion.', does not make sense. As a result of what? I have never come across dry and preserved ingredients of Chinese food to be cheaper than their fresh counter-part, so why should that be a reason to use preserves as a food source? 81.133.97.199 (talk) 09:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

How can Hakka cuisine be from SE China, when it is said the Hakkas came to SE China from other parts of China? 81.154.203.177 (talk) 22:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 16:59, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Gag
The headersection is an unreadable garbage. It reads vaguely like a marketing brochure, except I can't tell if it wants me to buy or sell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.23.87.47 (talk) 04:10, 16 August 2019 (UTC)