Talk:Seolleongtang

WP Food assessment

I rated this article as a low importance C-class article. A single type of Korean soup. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 03:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Second syllable?

Question: if the second syllable is properly pronounced neong then why is it pronounced leong? Badagnani 18:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

• The N is assimilated with the preceding L. Kappa 12:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

What does this mean?

Regarding this statement: "Originally seolleongtang (설렁탕), the hanja characters "雪濃湯", with similar pronunciation, were then adapted for the name of the soup." -- what does this mean? What was the original meaning of the word if it's not Sino-Korean? Badagnani 02:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Deletion

I object to this deletion of text and commonly used hanja, without explanation. Please restore. Badagnani 18:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Note

I object to the title of this article. 설렁탕 should be Sullungtang (Sul-lung-tang). I have no idea why the 엉 sound is translated as eong, and why the 얼 sound is translated as eol. They should be ung and ul --—Preceding unsigned comment added by Orthodoxy (talk • contribs)

It's very simple: "eo" (Revised Romanization) is used as the substitute for the "ŭ" formerly used to represent the "u" sound (as in English "but") in Korean. This use of Revised Romanization serves to standardize Korean romanizations at Wikipedia, without using diacritics. Remember that "u" in Korean romanization can also produce the "oo" sound, as in the word "dubu." Hence the use of "eo" here. Badagnani 16:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Oxtail

Isn't it made from Oxtail? Badagnani 05:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

No. It is made from the bone of cow's leg

See [1] and [2] and [3]Badagnani (talk) 16:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of "雪濃"

The Standard Korean Dictionary (한글국어대사전) does not include any hanja 雪濃 in the explanation of Seolleongtang(설렁탕). So, it is removed. It is wrong explanation that Seolleongtang(설렁탕) can be written as 雪濃湯.

See [4] Badagnani (talk) 16:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

http://krdic.naver.com/detail.nhn?docid=21209600 What some of people misspell the food with the wrong hanja does not justify "wrong information" to exist in this encyclopedia. --Appletrees (talk) 17:12, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Alternate spellings should be given (and their origin and use explained) in the article rather than blanked. Badagnani (talk) 17:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

雪濃 is NOT an alternate spelling according to KOREAN DIONCTIONARIES except the wikidictionary created by you. --Appletrees (talk) 17:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

There are over 9 thousand hits. Someone, or some nine thousand of them, are using this spelling. It's important to explain who is using this spelling, and why. Badagnani (talk) 19:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Legs

Should "four legs" be changed to "forelegs" (i.e., that only the front legs are used)? If so, what are the sources stating this, and why are the rear legs not also used? Badagnani (talk) 16:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Should "four legs" be changed to "forelegs" (i.e., that only the front legs are used)? If so, what are the sources stating this, and why are the rear legs not also used? Badagnani (talk) 05:10, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

雪濃湯

There are over 16 thousand hits. Someone, or some 16 thousand of them, are using this spelling. It's important to explain who is using this spelling, and why; if it's "incorrect" in Korean, it's important to explain why that is, summarizing the sources that state this. Badagnani (talk)

Korean sources. Badagnani (talk) 01:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Please improve this section rather than blanking all text. Badagnani (talk) 01:00, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not continue to blank this sourced text, which shows now over 20 thousand hits for this spelling variation, thank you. Badagnani (talk) 23:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Undiscussed blanking of sourced text

Please restore the text regarding the Chinese-language usage of the name 雪濃湯, as verified by the Chinese-language interwiki at http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%9B%AA%E6%BF%83%E6%B9%AF , and blanked in this edit. Thank you. Badagnani (talk) 23:43, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Again, you get in my nerve as calling my removing your original research "blanking". When did you verify the claim? You go there and bring a source from the page if it really has one.--23:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

As stated just above, more than once, the spelling appears on tens of thousands of Chinese websites and is the very spelling used in our Mandarin Chinese Wikipedia. Please do not continue blanking information to this effect. We should have the most thorough article possible on this subject, and that does include giving alternate names used in neighboring countries (much as the term Tamale is an incorrect construction; in Mexico, the food is called, in its singular form, a tamal). Badagnani (talk) 23:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Would you kindly moderate your tone? Mentioning "getting on one's nerves" is inflammatory and un-Wikipedian language. Badagnani (talk) 23:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

• Chinese-language source.

• Chinese-language source.

• Chinese-language source (in simplified form, 雪浓汤)

• Chinese-language source (Korean cuisine cookbook)

• Chinese-language source.

• Chinese-language Wikipedia article.

Badagnani (talk) 00:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you finally have a mind to confirm your theory? Then, confirm each by each and then prove your claim "The wrong usage is widely used in Chinese speaking world than the original hanja spelling. As for incivility, you still keep calling my removal of your unsourced claim "blanking" which is highly inappropriate and inflammatory. When it comes to your original research with no reliable citation, I have no patience along with "hidden remarks". If there is no reliable source, any claim gotta go from ENCYCLOPEDIA. According to your page, you can read Chinese language, so please prove that the spelling is widely used among Chinese people from reliable Chinese media/ or Chinese-Korean dictionary. Regards--Caspian blue (talk) 00:14, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, much of the information contained in our encyclopedia is found not only in dictionaries, but in other types of reputable sources, a half dozen of which are presented just above. For example, the name Muk cannot be found in most dictionaries, yet we have a Wikipedia article about this Pokemon character. Please restore the text you removed, thank you. Regarding blanking, when it is clear from an examination of the Google hits (in this case over 20 thousand) that the term is widely used (although apparently a corruption), the proper way to proceed is to place a "fact" tag and/or post at discussion rather than simply excise the text entirely, and repeatedly; to remove the text summarily truly is blanking, especially when sources had already been provided. Badagnani (talk) 00:16, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 21:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Misuse of 雪濃湯

See the reference. 雪濃湯 is misused in chinse dictionary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.252.40.207 (talk) 01:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you be more clear? Badagnani (talk) 01:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

See reference that I have added to the "misused" in the body text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.211.221.148 (talk) 20:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The current wording: "misspelling is used", is correct. Badagnani (talk) 20:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I fixed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.211.221.148 (talk) 20:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Chinese is a different language from Korean, and it appears that in Chinese, 雪濃湯 is used to refer to this Korean dish, which is popular in Korean restaurants in China. There are many examples of different hanzi/hanja between Chinese and Korean, for the same thing. Badagnani (talk) 20:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The Chinese misuse the spelling of seolleongtang. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.211.221.148 (talk) 20:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Chinese is a different language from Korean. They are free to spell words as they like. Badagnani (talk) 21:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Scallion to Welsh onion

Why was scallion changed to Welsh onion? Badagnani (talk) 22:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Seongjong to Sejong

Why was Seongjong changed to Sejong without comment? Badagnani (talk) 22:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Grammar

"But, the front legs gives better taste" is improper grammar. Please fix. Badagnani (talk) 22:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Recipe

The recipe is in poor English, and should also be rewritten as prose. Badagnani (talk) 22:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Seolleongtang and Sulen Origin Story Source Check: Mongolian Invasion of Koryo (Goryeo) in 13 BC or 13th century according to source?

There doesn't seem to be any evidence supporting the Mongolian Invasion of Koryo (Goryeo) happening in 13 BC. There were invasions in the 13th century (1200's) but none in 13 BC. Here is a wiki page describing invasions of Goryeo:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Korea

Here is the quoted section on the wiki page:

"Another historical opinion precedes the Joseon dynasty concerning the origin of seolleongtang. According to this, the food was originated by the Mongolian invasion of Koryo in 13 BC. Mongolian food "Sulen" is sliced and boiled beef with green onions, which developed into seolleongtang in Korea. [5]"

This is the cited source:

[5] Do, H. (2011). 전쟁이 요리한 음식의 역사[History of war and food]. Seoul: Sidaeuichang

Can someone check if this source actually says that the Mongolian invasion of Koryo was in 13 BC?

I think this should be "13th century". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyng09 (talk • contribs) 04:44, 11 May 2021 (UTC)