Talk:Olla podrida

Olla podrida is not definitively a Galician dish
I have edited the Galician reference to this typical Castilian dish. Please, note that the original article still says that this is a Spanish dish from Burgos. Burgos is not in Galicia, but in Castile (Spain). Please, go to the Spanish Wikipedia entry about this dish for further reference: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olla_podrida. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dulaman (talk • contribs) 17:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC) <!--Autosigned by SineBot--


 * I came across this site:http://www.archive.org/details/elsupremoromance00whituoft which may be helpful. It is an older pub. and on page 30 it speaks of olla and beef. Olla is standing alone in this instance. The book is very interesting and I want to read it but I won't download it and print it. Olla intrigued me and that is why I am here. Luck all. Bob

New York Times checked a fact with this article
See here. This is the version they read and here's the rapid rewrite! Tyrenius (talk) 00:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced questionable material

 * Olla podrida is a popular dish in Spain, especially Castile, and dates back to the Middle Ages.


 * After the French arrived, they fell in love with the recipe for olla podrida and imported it into their country as potpourri. Like olla podrida, it contains a wide variety of ingredients, and the word took on in French the metaphorical sense of a mixture of diverse things.


 * In the 19th century it also acquired (also in France) the meaning of a musical composition formed from fragments or themes from diverse works. And it was precisely with this musical meaning that France returned to Spain a French-style olla podrida, with the word "potpourri." It is said that "the orchestra interpreted a potpourri of..." because it sounds better than saying "interpreted an olla podrida (rotten stew) of..." Such is the most frequent use of "potpourri," that however can be used to allude to any mixture of diverse things.


 * The name translates literally to "rotten pot," leading to theories that the stew incorporated old bits of meat which were starting to "go off."

The above is unsourced questionable material. I looked and found no reliable published source for it. Please do not re-add without a reliable published source. WAS 4.250 (talk) 01:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Who says it is questionable, W? From my knowledge of Latin and the Romance languages, I say it is eminently plausible. Far more plausible than what it replaced! (Check earlier versions.) It is enough that there is a recent call for citations, which any reader will take as a call for caution also. If we simply took out material that someone's girlfriend thought was wrong (yes, check the history), half our articles would be stripped of content.
 * –&thinsp; Noetica ♬♩&thinsp;Talk 01:58, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll put back only what I read when I searched for sources. Don't put back the rest without a source. Wikipedia is not "stuff that seems plausible". WAS 4.250 (talk) 16:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Probably NOT originally "poderida"
Worth reading: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005359.html ~ 98.115.255.240

Probably NOT originally "poderida"
Worth reading: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/005359.html 98.115.255.240 (talk) 13:32, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

IPA
Podriða is closer to it, but it's not ð but a devoiced d Athanasius V (talk) 20:00, 14 January 2024 (UTC)