Talk:Suckling pig

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.


The idea that "suckling pig" is incorrect strikes me as somewhat hyper-correct proscription. I was always under the impression that the term referred to the noun "suckling" and not the gerund form of "suckle". As far as I know, "suckling pig" is by far the most common. The title and wording of the article should be reconsidered.

Peter Isotalo 23:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I must agree. The idea that a word or phrase in very common usage is "wrong" is simple bigoted arrogance. Millions of people use the phrase suckling pig to describe the food. Further, the word obviously had very old roots to a time and place where suckling with an l was the preferred pronunciation. Insisting that everyone must change their pronunciation of the word to fit some modern rules of spelling is like asking everyone to call weiners "viennas".DHBoggs 16:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus(talk) 02:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Sucking pig → Suckling pig — The most common term is without doubt "suckling pig". The objections by certain scholars can easily be pointed out in the lead without the need of renaming the article as a whole. Peter Isotalo 18:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

[edit] Survey - in support of the move

  1. Support. The rationale used for the current title sounds pedantic at best, OR at worst. The noun "suckling" to mean "an infant or a young animal that is not yet weaned"[1][2][3] dates back around 500 years; the etymology is "suck" + "-ling", not "suckle" + "-ing", which is what the author of this piece seems to assume. --SigPig |SEND - OVER 19:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  2. Support suckling is far more common 205.157.110.11 22:33, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  3. Support. No brainer. "Sucking pig" is just a typo, for christ's sake. --Yath 04:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  4. Support per above Percy Snoodle 17:55, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey - in opposition to the move

  1. Oppose Suckling is already re-directed so it has not "disappeared" as a term for search. Further, the reference citation, _the Oxford Companion to Food_ is VERY specific in the difference in sucking vs. suckling and the article does note that suckling pig is the more common term in use. So all this energy to switch around the re-direct? Is that my understanding? Also, how does the removal of explanation for the lesser used phrase, "sucking" add to further knowledge? --jadepearl 03:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
    This is not about removing information. We're just seeking to move the article to the most common title. The contrived idea that 500 years worth of etymology has all been one long mistake will remain, but it won't be in the form of "everyone has it wrong". Try googling for either term, by the way. You'll see that "suckling pig" outnumbers "sucking pig", and on top of that the latter will include a whole bunch of references to "scum sucking pigs". / Peter Isotalo 09:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Add any additional comments:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.