Talk:Claypot rice

Latest comment: 4 years ago by UniNoUta in topic Too hyper-specific?
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Claypot chicken rice. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:31, 21 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Too hyper-specific?

edit

It seems that "Claypot chicken rice" might be a bit too specific for an article title. While chicken is by far the most common protein to be used, it's not the universal choice by any stretch. Simply "Claypot rice" and noting in the article that chicken is the most common variation makes a lot more sense. It's kind of like if "fried rice" didn't have a page but "pork fried rice" did. 148.4.201.147 (talk) 17:03, 23 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Can't think of a single reason not to. I'd give it a week to see if anyone cares enough to weigh in before changing it, but it seems like a no-brainer. Certainly Bo Zai Fan should have its own page, and morphing this into it (rather than creating one for itself) makes more sense. UniNoUta (talk) 19:54, 24 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
+1 2604:2000:718E:7200:8530:D586:378:BA3E (talk) 13:40, 28 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, not even waiting on this one. Bo Zai Fan should have its own page. If someone thinks Chicken Bo Zai Fan is so unique should also have a page, they can re-create it. Made redirects for bao zi fan and bao ji fan as well. UniNoUta (talk) 16:08, 28 January 2020 (UTC)Reply