Talk:Mushroom ketchup

"Historically, ketchup was originally prepared with mushrooms as a primary ingredient"

Our ketchup article states:

In the 17th century, the Chinese mixed a concoction of pickled fish and spices and called it (in the Amoy dialect) kôe-chiap or kê-chiap (鮭汁, Mandarin Chinese guī zhī, Cantonese gwai¹ zap¹) meaning the brine of pickled fish (鮭, salmon; 汁, juice) or shellfish.

By the early 18th century, the table sauce had made it to the Malay states (present day Malaysia and Singapore), where it was discovered by English explorers. The Indonesian-Malay word for the sauce was kecap (pronounced "kay-chap"). That word evolved into the English word "ketchup"...

Given this assertion, it is difficult to see how a claim that ketchup was 'originally' made with mushrooms can be supported - unless the ketchup article is wrong. As it stands, the source cited doesn't make the 'pickled fish' claim, but there are certainly sources that do: [1][2] AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

•  Fixed This article was updated to state, "In the United Kingdom, ketchup was historically made with mushroom as a primary ingredient" (italic emphasis mine). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mushroom ketchup/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 03:50, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

GA criteria

Well-written:

With the issues outlined below having been addressed, the article complies with MoS with regards to grammar, as well as layout/structure. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 06:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

Verifiable with no original research:

The article refers to and makes thorough use of a number of reputable sources. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:54, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose)

(c) it contains no original research

Broad in its coverage:

The article covers all encyclopedically relevant aspects of its topic. No detection of irrelevant details. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:53, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

The article maintains an unbiased approach to its subject. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:52, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

The revision history shows that at this time, the article has not been subjected to edit warring or disputes for at least several months. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 08:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

All three images used in the article are appropriately licensed for easy use in Wikipedia, and all three serve relevant illustrative purposes in this particular article. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 08:21, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

Comments

• Seeing as the line "Several species of edible mushrooms are usable in its preparation," from paragraph 1 of "Preparation", is surrounded on both sides by sentences worded in past-tense, wouldn't it better to put that sentence in past-tense as well?
  • This also goes for the first sentence in "Use in other condiments".
    • I have copy edited the article, and believe that issues with tense have been resolved. I have also copy edited for organization, whereby historical information is now mostly under a "History" header 2 section. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:50, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
• Also in that paragraph, when it says, "The version in The English Art of Cookery lists dried mushrooms to be used for the ketchup's preparation," I'd personally recommend opting for such wording as "... calls for dried mushrooms to be used..." instead. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 10:04, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
  •  Done. Makes sense. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:51, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Checks out, now! :) Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 06:50, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

The article now qualifies as GA. Congratulations! Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 06:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Commercial bias

This page contains five separate reference to 'Geo Watkins' ketchup. Even if the brand has some historical significance, this seems like an advert. I'd suggest the article is edited to reduce specific brand mentions, even if they aren't overt advertisements. Amosharper (talk) 11:09, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

In light of this, I removed the following sentence, primarily because it does not add to the article:

• The company was founded in 1830. ref name="Bell" ref name="Hawkins 2012"

Angryredplanet (talk) 12:09, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. I'd rather remove the text beneath the pics because they are brand names. Any objection? 92.11.237.214 (talk) 17:06, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

The 2nd photo of a pretty basket with mushrooms and the bleedin' obvious written beneath, seems completely unnecessary. I propose removing it. Objections? 92.11.237.214 (talk) 17:07, 30 July 2019 (UTC)