Talk:Massaman curry

title

The title of this article (Massaman) is inconsistent with the photo of the can of curry (Masaman). Unfortunately, I came to Wikipedia for discussion of which is the generally accepted correct spelling! I am inclined to go with the can.... unless someone has a reason for the alternate.

Notabox (talk) 02:39, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

It's a transliteration, and as such the spelling with English letters is utterly meaningless. Additionally most English speakers wouldn't pronounce Massaman and Masaman differently, and even if they did, most bystanders wouldn't notice the difference. ¦ Reisio (talk) 13:04, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

There are three syllables here and in Thai the phonetic transcription is accurate from the Thai writing, e.g., ma-sa-man. However, when you hear how it is pronounced, at times there is a clear "d" sound from the ส, as well as an "s" sound mad-sa-man. In any case there are a variety of spellings and pronunciations. Because of that the canonical spelling could easily be one as much as another. The Longo dictionary does have แกงมัดสมั่น (with the "d") as the proper pronunciation. We at [1] with our Thai language products are going with gang mahd sa man as the English phonetic transcription in English. --Jeffmcneill (talk) 11:42, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

The title "massaman curry" is due to wikipedia's insistence on using common names. Per the official Thai transcription system (RTGS), it should be written "matsaman", and "kaeng matsaman". - Takeaway (talk) 01:46, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Named after stateman from Kedah?

I removed a section of the article which states that the name massaman might have come from the Kedah statesman Wan Mat Saman. This is impossible as he lived around the turn of the 20th century (see Wan Mat Saman Aqueduct) whereas the poem already describes this dish by name at the end of the 18th century. - Takeaway (talk) 23:53, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Massaman curry. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111009033820/http://www.cnngo.com/explorations/eat/worlds-50-most-delicious-foods-067535?page=0%2C0 to http://www.cnngo.com/explorations/eat/worlds-50-most-delicious-foods-067535?page=0%2C0

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 01:59, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Bias opening

In 2011, CNNGo ranked massaman curry as the #1 most delicious food in an article titled World's 50 most delicious foods.[2] However, by a reader's survey, it ranked number ten.[3] It remained at number one in the official, updated 2018 version.[4]

Is this really worth including in the opening section? Sure it's a nice dish, but an opinion from some random American news corps online subsidiary feels like a weird inclusion. 1.145.215.241 (talk) 22:16, 14 August 2022 (UTC)