Talk:Pollock roe

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unnotability of Sales Locations[edit]

For a food that is "one of the common ingredients used in Japanese cuisine", it seems quite unnotable that it is sold in a particular place, so I have removed such. If certain sales places are notable, please restore them, saying why they are notable and citing a reference. 75.185.66.16 21:17, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Like many foods in Japan, mentaiko is considered a meibutsu, that is, a famous item from a particular locality. It has in the years since its introduction spread throughout Japan and come to be used throughout the country, but that does not change the fact that Hakata is particularly famous for its mentaiko (just as Hiroshima is famous for okonomiyaki, Nikko for its yuba, Uji for its green tea), that stores specializing in mentaiko can be found all over Hakata and nowhere else, and that just about every souvenier shop in the country markets mentaiko as a local specialty. LordAmeth (talk) 04:05, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cite Sources[edit]

This article has been cited for lack of sources for over two months, yet more information has been added since then, without citing sources. Let's clean it up. 75.185.66.16 21:37, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found a source for its Korean origin. The etymology for the name still needs a source. 75.185.66.16 23:02, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to see the source. I just skimmed the Japanese version of the article and it doesn't seem to say the same thing here about the origin Sleepytako (talk) 03:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Simple. There is no Japanese word for 明太. It only used on this Mentaiko. I put the Japanese article ja:明太 as a reference. Then in Korean is 明太 called pollock. So the name itself is evident evidence. Ugha (talk) 09:01, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging[edit]

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 carefull 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) 17:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

origin[edit]

The word mentai is not from Korean. Japan and Korea had used that same word word after Chinese word. And it is uncorrect to say mentaiko origin in Korean cuisine. It is true that Kawahara had invented after Korean salting roe of pollock which is simple preservation food. But also Japanese had ate roe of pollock, which had solting for preservation. Maybe the idea to put Chili pepper may adopted, but, mentaiko, which need many process to make taste, and what Korean ate, are completely different. Volclex (talk) 18:29, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I Dear Volclex, The Japanese name of pollock (Korean - Chinese : 명태明太) has its own katakana name, スケトウダラSueketowdara that refers for other chinese letter (介党鱈) in Japanese. The name "Mentai" clearly refers 明太(Korean: 명태Myung-Tai.) since Chinese letter of Alaska pollock is 狭鳕( Its chinese pronunciation seems Xiá xuě, according to Google translator.). As a recipe,there is many versions of 명란젓 in Korea. In my personal reflection, the name of Mentaiko is almost a Kawahara san's product name. You may introduce the Japanese salted roe of pollock at its own wikipedia page with its traditional name. I hope I can try the Japanese salted roe of pollock, when I visit Japan in future. It is great information for people! 65.51.46.52 07:40, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

no sources[edit]

I have no source on this but I have a hard time believing that the Japanese source this fish roe from an Atlantic fish species. Perhaps it is sourced from Alaskan Pollock which is in the cod family. This would make more sense since when I asked my Japanese girlfriend about it she said it was cod roe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.208.108.199 (talk) 02:40, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

some sources on ja.wikipedia.org[edit]

Mentai/mentaiko is another word for tarako[1]. Mentaiko/tarako in a wide sense would include Pacific cod (madara) but generally, it is made from the roe of the Alaska pollock (suketoudara)[2] Mentai/mentaiko is considered a word from a dialect of Japanese, Fukuoka dialect and the word itself may have come from the Chinese word for pollock.[3] Also, not sure why "onigiri" is considered the "usual" way of eating it.[4] (I've always had it with white rice growing up and it wasn't until convenience stores in Japan started to have onigiri that I had mentai in onigiri) Mofoq (talk) 02:05, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%98%8E%E5%A4%AA
  2. ^ http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89%E3%81%93
  3. ^ http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89%E3%81%93#.E5.90.8D.E7.A7.B0
  4. ^ http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%9F%E3%82%89%E3%81%93#.E9.A3.9F.E3.81.B9.E6.96.B9

Merger proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to merge. --Postcol (talk) 11:47, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that Tarako (food) be merged into Pollock roe. The content in the Tarako (food) article can easily be explained in the context of Pollock roe, and the Pollock roe article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Tarako (food) will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. --Gidiyorum (talk) 09:26, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would it affect the Korean/Japanese version? --Komitsuki (talk) 12:14, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Komitsuki: I don't think so. It'll match better to them if merged. --Gidiyorum (talk) 14:15, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As long as there is no information being deleted during the merging. I'm ok with it. --Komitsuki (talk) 14:17, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have no real knowledge of either subject matter as such, but the merger makes editing sense to me. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:22, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No objections here. —howcheng {chat} 01:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pollock_roe&oldid=1218136562"