Template talk:Cuisines

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Food and drink This template is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink Food and Drink task list: edit history watch purge To edit this page, select here Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink: Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish Participate in project-related deletion discussions. Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this. Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here. Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

This is beautiful. Marnanel 04:40, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes, it is. It is inspired by Modèle:Serie cuisine. On the French Wikipedia, they had this article series box for a long time already. Lupo 07:06, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

yes it is. I'm not trying to get credit for something I "just" translated, the fact that it was only a translation is written on my user page ^^;

FiP 13:22, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Could we try to hash out some sort of guideline for what should be included under "National Cuisines"? Some possibilities:

1. Ad-hoc; whatever people care to add (ie, no guidelines)
2. Every existing article on a national cuisine
3. Just the "Big Four" (as defined by Iron Chef - ok, this is a little silly) : French, Italian, Chinese, Japanese
4. Get rid of the section altogether, since inclusion or exclusion from it is something of a POV-type choice

Choices 1 and 2 worry me a little bit regarding the size of the template. I guess it isn't a big deal to have tall box like this, but I still have this feeling that this template is a guest on the pages that include it and should behave itself...

And just to muddy the waters, what about cuisines that aren't national but ethnic, like Jewish cuisine and similar? Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:25, 12 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4) is the only reasonable choice IMHO. Choices 1 and 2 will eventually even out as editors continue to add their own national cuisines. 3) is too limited. The smaller and more focused the template, the better. Another idea would be to completely get rid of grouping them by location, but by cultures (which would take care of the Jewish cuisine). Sortan 23:55, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agreee that 4) is the way to go... I'll del the section.

You can't just list some nations and not others, so I've added back the missing countries. Funandtrvl (talk) 17:46, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This template survived a debate at TfD. The discussion can be found here. -Splash^talk 21:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion It would better serve the encyclopedia to have a picture of the food whos page this template is on, in the template its self. This would follow with the other info boxes that have room for a different picture depending on the artical. I also find it useful to be able to quickly see what this 'thing' (whatever the artical is on) looks like. Comments? -Fcb981 00:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should try to avoid including this template in articles that aren't actually linked from it. The idea of having images that can be switched from one article to another is a pretty neat one, but it does have the downside of making that image excessively small. Either that or making the template too large. So many other projects are crapping up their best articles by insisting on truly horrendous monsters of templates that remind one more of editorial cuckoo chicks than helpful navigation aides, needlessly hogging the most prominent part of articles.

For any article that isn't actually linked in the template I think we should instead use a horizontal layout that goes at the bottom of the page. After all, the first impression of the article should be focused on the actual article topic, not a truckload of related links; that's something that should really come after one has read (or even just glanced) through the article itself.

Peter ^Isotalo 22:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anyone willing to make this template foldible or collapsible? I think this template seems useless and takes too much space on an introductory paragraph of every cuisine articles by nationality. ---- Appletrees (talk) 21:43, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A better solution might be to remove it from articles that aren't actually linked from the template.

Peter ^Isotalo 00:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still think the template is useless and prevents each national cuisine from being representative. You suggest I have to remove the tool from irrelevant articles instead of requesting it foldible here, but I don't think i can remove it from Asian cuisine articles at all. If I do so, members of Project Food and Drink would not happy about my opinion and would revert the edit.

One of Project Food and Drink member switched the order on Korean cuisine as (s)he pushed that the template placed first. The template is just a tool to aid, and not to be dominated on articles.

I wish someone to edit the template foldible. If someone want to jump to other cuisine after s/he see an article, the person can click and spread the template and go as s/he wishes. --Appletrees (talk) 07:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should bring this up at the project talkpage instead. The actions of one member doesn't necessarily represent that of the entire projects.

Peter ^Isotalo 10:05, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What if the template were made horizontal as you suggested in the above conversation Peter? I had suggested this awhile ago somewhere else and got slammed by a number of editors, but currently Appletrees and some others are "discussing" on the Korean cuisine article this same issue. By placing it horizontal at the bottom of articles, this gives the ability for users to use the navigability of the template and then allows a "representative" picture of the cuisine at the top right of the article.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 14:04, 1 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the choice is between people bickering over which cuisine articles to include it in and going for a horizontal design, I definitely prefer the latter. Using that space for a lead pic relevant to the individual articles is also a very strong argument for the horizontal option.

Peter ^Isotalo 02:20, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the template looks better, but could the bright brick-orange color perhaps be lightened a bit? Badagnani (talk) 20:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For example, Template:Wines has all pastel colors. Badagnani (talk) 20:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was just making it the color the other template had, do you think the purple color is better?--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 20:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changed it to pastel blue.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 03:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The navbox was missing all of the cuisines of Oceania (Australia, New Zealand, Pacific islands, etc), which do not fall under any other region currently linked. This seemed like a *major* oversight, so I've added it as a region. BookhouseBoy (talk) 18:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but a but dusappointing that it only goes to a Category page... --BozMo talk 20:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a bit of a revert-contest whether the template should cover general foods or types of dishes. I think the former is more advisable since it allows more entries and can over both basic staples and basic dishes.

Peter ^Isotalo 09:30, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the term "Type of Dish" is more helpful for this template because the term "food" is extremely general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taowind (talk • contribs) 09:42, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking the choice of food in this template was a bit odd. Some are fairly general like sauce and dessert; others are more specific like noodle which is a particular sort of pasta and pizza which is a specific bread product. Why not curry, which is more general? And cassava, sweet potato and yam might be better as separate entries rather than unde the cadre of ground provisions.

I thought it would be best to turn the current 'food' section into subsections:'sorts of food' which would include the most general like meat and fruit, 'carbohydrate staples' which would include the likes of bread and rice and 'types of preparation' like dip and sauce as well as 'courses' which would take dessert and have main course among others added to it. Munci (talk) 15:36, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is the utility of including a link to this 'outline' business, when that page basically just duplicates this entire template? The Potato Hose ↘ 16:40, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CLN. (And whilst it's fine to request input for an AfD (eg. Outline of cuisines), it's not good practice to delete links to an article whilst it's under discussion. Using 'scarequotes' is also not helpful.) –Quiddity (talk) 20:01, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CLN --> ctrl-f --> 'outline' -- 0 results. So, again, what exactly is the utility of, on a template, including a link to a page that... lists everything you just saw on the template, which also appears at the bottom of this new redundant page you have just clicked through to. The Potato Hose ↘ 20:25, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bengali cuisine, for example, is placed under regional cuisine, but Punjabi cuisine is placed under ethnic/religious group cuisine. The regional cuisine section mostly contains very large regions (such as Latin America), making Bengal seem out of place; and the ethnic/religious group section lists cuisine that doesn't necessarily have a strict geographic association (such as Jewish or Buddhist), which makes Punjab (and possibly a few others) seem out of place. I think it would be good to figure out a more suitable categorization system for the template. Secondplanet (talk) 14:30, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved a couple of cuisines into the 'Ethnic and Religious' section:

• 'Soul food' from the 'Styles' section, and
• 'Bengal' from the 'Regional' section (changing it to 'Bengali' in the process). Meticulo (talk) 23:58, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry to be an anonymous scrub, but I just wanted to note something sort of related to this. Why is American and Spanish cuisine broken down into to so many sub groups but, for instance, Chinese is followed only by (Tibetan). Wouldn't it be reasonable for it to have comparable breakdown, such as Sichuan, Cantonese, Hunan, and other dominant styles? Italian also has quite many notable, distinct regional styles. I understand this can't be done for every single granular regional difference, but those which have widespread recognition, like the cuisines of specific regions that have academic or popular attention in countries outside their own national origin. Just thought I'd note. Have a great day! 63.66.64.247 (talk) 19:08, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

• • Punjabi cuisine

Should be added as an additional citation under the umbrella of Indian cuisine. 2601:204:C200:1BA0:90D:A3BE:595E:9D8A (talk) 08:47, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from under Pakistani to under ethnic groups. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:33, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Added Romani cuisine to ethnic cuisines. 2603:8001:400:2:F5FA:CB30:1D6A:7914 (talk) 21:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All done! Thank you for your contributions. TGHL ↗ 02:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

please add ((Nicaraguan cuisine|Nicaraguan)) 2601:541:4580:8500:876:330C:CAF8:4EDC (talk) 18:35, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done – NJD-DE (talk) 19:06, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add Louisiana Creole cuisine to ethnic cuisines. 80.71.157.208 (talk) 04:45, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

•  Done Thanks. Ovinus (talk) 23:00, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add Breton cuisine (redirect) as part of France's regional cuisines 95.18.76.21 (talk) 17:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: Please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template.

Per WP:NAVNOREDIRECT and WP:EXISTING, it is not customary to add redirect links to navboxes.
— Urro^{[talk][edits]} 12:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Move the Caucasian cuisine to Europe or alternatively add it so that it is both in Europe and Asia. Much of the Caucasus is geographically in Europe and is generally associated with Europe. It doesn't make sense that Caucasian cuisine is excluded from Europe, where it plays a significant role, especially in Eastern Europe.--107.122.189.125 (talk) 02:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC) 107.122.189.125 (talk) 02:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: The Caucasus Mountains are geographically in Asia (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia). They are only slightly in the European part of Russia. Please provide a source with your statement. Awhellnawr123214 (talk) 23:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caucasus cuisines include North Caucasus, which is entirely in Europe... Read the article if you like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:79e1:abc:1a0a:d4ae:aeee:eb13:ef0d (talk) 18:03, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 04:18, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have the same critique as the comment above. Placing Caucasus cuisine only in Asia is factually and historically indefensible. As for reliable sources, here's one I found easily:

“The watershed of the Greater Caucasus, the backbone of the system, traditionally has been part of the line dividing Europe and Asia, but Europe's eastern boundary has been the subject of much debate. One widely accepted scheme draws the dividing line along the crest of the Greater Caucasus range, putting the portion of the region north of the line in Europe and the portion south of it in Asia. Another puts the western portion of the Caucasus region in Europe and the eastern part (the bulk of Azerbaijan and small portions of Armenia, Georgia, and Russia's Caspian Sea coast) in Asia. Still another scheme identifies the Aras River and the Turkish border as the line of continental demarcation, thereby locating Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia in Europe”^[1]

At minimum North Caucasus is in Europe, but as you can see from the quote the rest of Southern Caucasus (e.g. Georgia) is quite often included as well. There's an entire page dedicated to this topic, so this is nothing new. --2A00:79E1:ABC:1A0A:5848:A772:6BF2:F1B3 (talk) 22:36, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Awhellnawr123214 asserts that Caucasian cuisine is "only slightly in the European part of Russia". For the purposes of the edit request queue, this marks this requested edit as "contentious", and unless they withdraw or a proper talk page consensus discussion determines a course of action, this particular requested edit is ineligible to remain open at this time. Please do not re-open this request unless Awhellnawr123214 withdraws or talk page discussion results in consensus for a particular edit. Note that this is not any sort of authoritative determination as to whether this edit will or will not be introduced or whether any arguments presented are or are not correct. My reply only explains that the edit request template cannot remain in an answered=no state at this time. —Sirdog (talk) 09:59, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the use of boldface in this template as non-standard, i.e. deprecated. I appreciate the desire to distinguish national from regional, but templates don't do that with typography. The bracketing (based on indentation levels in the wikitext) already makes the distinction, so the usage was redundant as well as non-standard. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:06, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Though the boldface was non-standard, removing it makes the template much harder to navigate. The bold formatting helped users quickly distinguish between regional categories and individual countries. Without it, it's just a wall of blue links that's difficult to scan. Indentation levels in the wikitext are not seen by most users, because most users just read the template, they don't go into the code, so I find this statement bizarre. Safyrr 03:47, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there is a good reason why not put forward or a good alternative for legibility proposed, I don't see any reason to not revert this change. Safyrr 03:53, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]