Talk:Chutney

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject_India This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
More information about this article...
Food Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is about a person, place, or concept whose name is originally rendered in one of the multiple Indic scripts; however the article does not have that version of its name in the article's lead paragraph. Anyone who is knowledgeable enough with the original language is invited to assist in adding the Indic script.

For more information, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Indic).


I read on a printed placemat in an Indian restaurant yesterday that "chutney" comes from a word that literally meant "things to lick". Truth or fiction? --FOo 17:06, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

According to Dictionary.com, truth.

The practice of transliterating the /tS/ of Indian languages as "c" is a well-established standard, quite far from archaic, and has a very good basis, since said sound contrasts in those languages with the aspirated /tSh/, which is the one properly transliterated "ch" (thus keeping the consistency of transliterating the aspirated consonants by means of -h digraphs: p/ph, b/bh, t/th, d/dh, c/ch, j/jh, k/kh, g/gh). Using "ch" for the unaspirated sound is like using "ee" and "oo" for the long /i:/ and /u:/ vowels (instead of the standard scientific transliteration, ī and ū), that is, an unscientific anglicized spelling. Uaxuctum 22:01, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't suppose this[1] would make a good external link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.198.89 (talk • contribs) 09:20, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

No, it would not. :) 130.184.237.232 19:39, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I added the weebls-stuff link before I saw this thread... I don't see why it's not a good link. I know it's kinda silly, but it is chutney-related, and it only takes up one line. Also, it mentions two foods that go good with chutney which are relatively obscure to an average North American, so it even has a slightly educational value. I think it should stay, since there's no actual violation of Wikipedia guidelines that I can detect. - Ugliness Man 15:18, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
It's exceedingly silly and trivial. Please see Wikipedia:External_links for guidance on appropriate external links. --Cactus.man ✍ 16:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Since it has very little educational value and the value it does has can be found through other more reliable sources or is simply considered common knowledge. By linking this animation, we should link every other animation that discusses chutney by principle. It certaintly does not have international acclaim nor has it effected the production or consumption or awareness of chutney. Leah 14:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Added a comment re: the animation in the "External Links" section

so that should take care of the animation problem, I hope. 130.184.237.233 19:03, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of which, how many times has that link been deleted and is there anything else that can be done if that doesn't stop the animation from being linked?

Numerous times. I added a hidden editor comment inside the page to not add it again. Hopefully that stops it. Leah 07:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Content very similar to http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-chutney.htm with no references on either pages. sgsdfsd —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.164.191.62 (talk) 06:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 17:40, 9 November 2007 (UTC)