text:
Help talk:Importing

To delete or not to delete
Should redirects in the Transwiki namespace be deleted or permanently kept? I think redirects should be deleted, however I decided not to add it to the proposed policy until its been discussed and some sort of consensus has been reached. --darklama 23:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the redirects should be deleted. I don't see a reason to keep around a million redirects that will never be used. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 23:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd say no, don't delete. They do no harm, and provide an easy way to find transwikied files (through following redirects). I doubt there'd be a million of them, and since they're all "Transwiki:PAGENAME", they won't be getting in anyone's way. -- SB_Johnny | talk 20:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It might be interesting to run some statistical comparisons on what kinds of files get transwiki'd and how they morph differently on the originating and hosting sites. But I wonder if somebody's hardrive somewhere would be bothered with, eventually, gazillions of files. I'd prefer to keep the data around, but then I am not much of a geek.[[User:Geof Bard गीता]] (discuss • contribs) 20:11, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * One would think this information could be reconstructed —more reliably— from Special:Log/import and Special:Log/move. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 23:46, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

I really don't like this policy at all
There are a lot of "musts" and "needs" in this policy, with a strange overtone of "do it or be deleted". Part of why we should want to use import rather than c&p transwiki is so that administrators (who should be familiar with WIW, etc.) are doing the importing, so hopefully it's not going to be junk. Most of this is just w:WP:CREEP (I think we should import that, BTW).

The transwiki namespace should just be where we put transwikis when they're first brought across. Leave the transwiki namespace modules up as redirects so we can use a simple template on wikipedia to let people know where it went. Double-redirect shouldn't be a problem unless the page is moved multiple times (as they sometimes do), in which case it's even more useful to have the transwiki:name module redirecting to the current location, because otherwise every time a module is moved we're going to have to search through all the other wikiprojects and look for links. If it's not hurting anything, why delete it? Deletion is not a sport, and we shouldn't be trying to look for more opportunities to use the delete button.

If there's going to be a rule, it should be that copy-paste transwikis no longer be permitted unless there ends up being a massive backlog at Requests for Import (we need a shortcut for that). And even then, it's not a huge problem to import over a copy-paste transwiki: just delete the page as is, import, than restore the versions that were made on wikibooks.

The addition of this tool should mean less work, not more work. More clarity for GFDL and cross-project cooperation, not content grabbing and hiding. -- SB_Johnny | talk 20:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

 * If you can get rid of the CREEPness of this proposal, I have no objections. This is just a draft after all. The first version I created consisted of just a list of what I thought was considered an already established use of Transwiki. I was going for "this is what its used for", "this is why its needed" and "this is the transition that generally takes place", with a few reminders of established policies and guidelines thrown in just in case anyone reading this isn't famulor with related policies and guidelines.

 * I get your POV and it would be easier to change the Transwiki redirects here rather then trying to find all locations that use the template your talking about and update them each time a change is made. Is there any guanrentee though that for the other projects part that such pages would remain permanet as well? Once moved here, pages might very well be deleted or reused for contents that does belong. There is a limited amount that can be done to help users of other projects find what is being looked for here on other projects or other websites. Why not instead have some kind of guide or book here for people use to other projects to help them learn how things are organized here so they can find what is being looked for? --darklama 22:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I disagree with alot of what both of you have said (which is convenient, because I probably wouldn't have commented at all if i agreed). First off, There are alot of "must" and "need" as a necessity: people can't go about the transwiki process in any haphazard way. People must use the import tool, if possible. People must format the page appropriately, and use a proper naming convention. Second, the transwiki namespace is just a holding tank for imported pages until they can be properly moved into the main module namespace. There is a distinct possibility that pages in this holding tank might very well be junk, or that they might be worthless garbage that doesn't belong here anymore then it belongs on the original project. Third, the point about keeping around all the redirects in the transwiki namespace, while not a major objection of mine, seems pointless. If the transwiki namespace is just a holding tank for imported material--and if that material might be moved, merged, altered, or deleted at will--then it seems to me that there is no sense maintaining a redirect in that namespace. Also, what happens when we want to import two pages with the same name from two different projects? We can't maintain two separate redirects on the same transwiki page. Maintaining links so that wikipedians can find the garbage that they dont want anymore shouldn't be our responsibility, and it only serves to take up server resources (which are, admittedly, cheap). --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 01:17, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * To be clear, I was referring to dealing with the "do it or be deleted" overstone that SB_Johnny is concerned with for my first point. Yes admins are the ones going to be using the import tool and are the only ones who can use it from what I understand so they should know whats approperate for Wikibooks, but No its not enough to ensure Transwiki namespace is used approperiatly, since Transwiki namespace is not restricted to admin use. Also admins are human and can and will make mistakes.

 * For my second point, Yes using templates on other projects referring to the Transwiki namespace here makes it easier here to maintain, but No I disagree that it makes sense, because it still depends on other projects just as much as links all over the place does. It still requires an assurance that other projects and websites maintain a means for users to find what they are looking for here on this project rather then providing the means here. I think its just a better bandade, but not a real solution to the problem. Proving the means here on this project for users to find moved contents, which seems to be what SB_Johnny wants, would remove the dependency on other projects and the need to maintain redirects in the Transwiki namespace, making it unnecessary to make the redirects permenant. I agree with you Whiteknight that maintaining redirects for reasons you've said doesn't make sense. The problem is exacerbated by the fact the same can happen on other projects as well, pages moved, merged, altered and deleted at will. Regardless of whether its Wikibooks responsibility or not to make it easier for users of other projects to find what they are looking for here, its certainly not other projects responsibility to do so, just as Wikibooks isn't responsibile for contents removed whether or not its contents is copied somewhere else more approperiate. --darklama 03:43, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, but the point is that it's less work for us not to delete them. And while the wikipedian "community at large" might have decided against including the material, the authors of the material obviously thought it was valuable (else they wouldn't have included it... you should take a look at the talk pages of these things where sometimes there are lengthy arguments about the importance of the materials), and perhaps might come to wikibooks and further improve their articles (now modules!)... assuming they can find them. Of course there will also be page moves and mergers on wikipedia and elsewhere, but that's not our concern, since the template will almost certainly move with it, and if it doesn't, well, that's not our problem. We can make a good-faith effort to ensure easy access to potential wikibooks contributors by simple not doing something, and when the easy way has advantages over the hard way, do it the easy way!
 * Interestingly though, another way they will be able to find them now will be to go through their own contributions (assuming we consistently use import, and make sure to merge page histories when we merge modules).
 * As far as importing the same named page from two different projects: it's probably unlikely. If it did happen, we could just delete whatever's there, and then create "soft redirects" to the two (or more) pages here. (Again, easy to do, because the admins are the ones doing the importing, and so also have the deletion tools).
 * "Why not instead have some kind of guide or book here for people use to other projects to help them learn how things are organized here so they can find what is being looked for?" -- absolutely :-). One good way to go about this would be to redo the welcome template: I started with a page in the WB namespace (Wikibooks for Wikipedians, which now has to be modified to include a discussion of the import tool/rules, and Local Manuals of Style, which points out that as far as wikibooks is concerned, wikipedia is just a really large wikibook with a rather complicated LMOS), I'll work on some more in my userspace (will link shortly). I rarely see the welcome template used here anyway, and it probably hasn't been updated in a long time.
 * "people can't go about the transwiki process in any haphazard way" -- well, if it were up to me, I'd set the bar of haphazardness rather low. For example, I don't see much problem with someone requesting import of a bunch of related articles (say, articles on woodworking and woodworking tools), organising them as book chapters, improving the structure and flow of them so that it becomes the skeleton of a book, and then tying it all together with detailed information about how to make things, safety protocols, etc.
 * The stuff in w:Category:Copy to Wikibooks on the other hand is about 1/2 and 1/2... I'm hoping they'll approve the use of a "no thanks" tag for the half that's useless. The other half is actually pretty good, so those materials can either be announced on the talk pages of books on related subjects, or else just cleaned up a bit and categorized as available stubs for incorporation into future books (we'll need some way to make these easy to find... another thing that should be included in the welcome template).
 * Off to play with the welcome template now :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 09:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * There could be a minimal timeframe in which Transwiki redirects are kept such as a few weeks to give a good faith effort to try to easy migration of potential contributors of the work. Whatever timeframe is decided on could then be included in the template(s) used on the other projects along with a link to the guide or book I was suggesting. Something like "This article has been moved to Wikibooks and can be found ... temporarly for 4 weeks. If the page you seek is no longer there, you can read ... to find out how to find it again." --darklama 12:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Oh a suggested title for this suggested guide or book I've come up with is "Migration for Contribitors of other Wikimedia Projects" and could be included on the main page and other spots once its gotten useable. This guide or book could also include other useful information for users of other wikimedia projects too. --darklama 12:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Can one of you guys just explain to me why just leaving the redirects is a problem? The fraction of a penny's worth of disk space? I really just don't get it. They're harmless (and therefore aren't worth the trouble of deleting), and potentially of use to someone, someday (and thus are worth keeping just in case). I really just don't see any reason for deleting them other than the "thrill of deletion" (joie de deletion?). -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:13, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * It's been our current de facto policy here that redirects that are un-linked to, and for which there is little potential that they will be used in a search, should be deleted. I don't think it likely that anybody is going to search for "Transwiki:Gardening/Seeds". Like I said above, this isn't a big sticking point for me, and I would be willing to change the guideline to say that "we must keep the redirects forever at all costs" if that was the will of the community, but I dont see any particular need. I would probably be happiest with "Old transwiki redirects may be deleted, or they may not be." --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 13:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * My view on redirects in general is that they should be deleted, because the more redirects there are with a similar name the more results you get from searching that may not be what your looking for. I don't think redirects are likely to be searched for specifically so they could just make it harder to find real contents in search results. This could result in having to goto the 10th page to find the results your looking for if the user doing the search hadn't gotten frustated and given up by then and decided what they need isn't here and goes elsewhere or creates duplicate contents. Redirects may be relatively cheap space-wise, but I think can become a burden bandwidth-wise in searching for example and in having contents being duplicated because a person thought the subject wasn't already covered. I would like to see the redirect rules for speedy deletion updated to not requiring ensuring that there not being linked to by other websites, since that shouldn't be Wikibook's problem either. I could understand keeping some redirects though, like common misspellings and synonyms, unless someone wants to use it for something else. I don't think Transwiki redirects should be given any special exceptions to existing rules. I think Wikibooks should try to avoid the potential problem of more redirects to actual pages ratio. --darklama 14:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * (response below tab reset...)

reset tabs (I really don't like this policy at all)
Yeah, a neither-here-nor-there version would work. Maybe a template could be affixed to them (e.g. archival redirects from October 2006), that way when 6 months, a year, whatever goes by, we can change the template to add all of them to speedy deletion. (How's that for a fun proposal :-)?)

As far as the policy goes, "unlinked" is "unclear" in these cases, because the cross-wiki links won't come red if the destination disappears (there was a bug submitted about this on bugzilla, but apparently it would bring the servers to a grinding halt, and we've had enough problems with servers grinding to a halt, thank you very much). -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:47, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I just don't want to be treated as auxiliary storage for wikipedia. When a page is imported to the transwiki space, and then moved to the main module space, it would probably just be a good idea to make a note of it on wikipedia, and tell them to update their links. Keep in mind that once a page is here, it could be divided up into multiple subpages, it could be merged into additional pages, (it could even be divided up, and the peices merged to multple pages), or it may be simply deleted on sight. A redirect that points to just one place (a place where the content may not actually be) seems worthless to me, or even worse then worthless: bad redirects will actually serve to confuse people. Keep in mind that pages that were written on wikipedia, but didn't quite fit the bill, do not necessarily make great textbook pages as-is. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 14:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Yeah, but it's not like we're going out of our way to make things easier, just not going out of our way to make things difficult. Common courtesy to the contributors on the WP side.
 * Darklama: once "Transwiki:" becomes a namespace, those pages won't show up in a search unless you specifically set your preferences to search in that namespace (default search is main namespace only). For example, unless you changed your prefs, you wouldn't currently be able to find a cookbook article (or anything else in the cookbook namespace). -- SB_Johnny | talk 14:29, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, on that note, we might want to mention in the welcome message that people here to write in the cookbook need to change their preferences...) -- SB_Johnny | talk 14:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't want redirects to be treated as essential and permanent textures used to keep links on other projects and websites working. There are problems with trying to do so. I wonder if the message seen on pages that don't exist could be changed here? I've noticed that other projects tend to use different messages. Could the message benifit from a change that includes a link to the suggested guide or book to help users find what they were expecting? I fixed references to "moving to main module space" yesterday or the day before, to instead refer to approperiate namespace since for instance in the case of recipies they belong in the Cookbook namespace rather then in the main namespace. --darklama 14:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Thus far I've been importing recipes directly into the cookbook, so that's not really an issue. I still don't see the problems with doing so, since the search issue is a non-issue. -- SB_Johnny | talk 15:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * If your searching in the Transwiki namespace its an issue. Also if your using Special:Prefixindex/Transwiki: because you really want to help fix things up and move them, finding the redirects from the pages that haven't been moved yet may be difficult to determan. I also agree with the reasons Whiteknight gave. --darklama 15:12, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That shouldn't be a problem... you can just use Special:Logs/Import, start at the beginning, and help just keep on top of them. It's not just the ones in the TW namespace that will need cleaning up :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 15:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

reset tab 2

 * I'm interested in solving it before it becomes a future problem that becomes unmanagable by stomping it out while its still a bud. Since redirects show up all over the place. A person would need to check the logs of moves in addition to logs of imports to get an idea of what imported contents may have been taken care of already or not. Beyond checking Special:Redirects, redirects are indistinguishable from normal links. It would be nice if redirects were tagged with say their own css class so they could be made to stick out easily. --darklama 15:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Actually it looks like guanaco has a bot for fixing double-redirects... hopefully he can just run it once a month or so and save us the trouble on that.
 * Part of my point was that whether something is sitting in the TW namespace may have little bearing on its current condition as far as cleanup is concerned. You're better off going through the import log and following whatever redirects there are to find the module's current location.
 * What I also want to do is create a template for the imports. This template would transclude 2 or 3 other templates (you would always subst it), such as ((dewikify)), ((rewrite in textbook manner)), ((find a home for this module)), etc. The transcluded templates could then be removed one by one as each task is completed. These templates would not be substituted, since they would also include categories (modules needing dewikification, modules needing textbookification, modules needing a home, etc.).
 * Um, hope that template thing makes sense :0. -- SB_Johnny | talk 15:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Part of my point is that redirect links are indistinguishable so without first clicking on them you have no idea if its a redirect or not. So for someone trying to help, they would have to click the link before knowing if its a redirect or a page that needs fixing and moving. The more imports there are the more pages that a person has to click through to find pages needing work. I'm interested in fixing pages that rely on redirected links so redirected are no longer used and can be safely deleted or reused. There seems to be some relunency to delete them even though rules allow for it. Having all imported pages catagoriesed would relieve some of the problems of finding the right pages. Can you explain why you think redirects should be kept and how its not a problem? --darklama 16:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I'll explain (again) later. Most of the cleanup concerns should be addressed by the templates below (check out the categories for details). -- SB_Johnny | talk 12:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

...but we might want to get moving
See A Wikimanual of Gardening/Seeds... pretty obvious that it's from wp, but no edit history, so it's copyvio. -- SB_Johnny | talk 10:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That's been taken care of, BTW... page was imported. -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Images
I just realised that we can also import images, which could fix a lot of the transwiki problems (if the images from the article are on wikipedia rather than on commons, they redlink here). We might need to talk some more about the fair use thing too :/. -- SB_Johnny | talk 10:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Templates
I made a bunch this morning, here's the scoop:

First, when transwikiing pages (and then moving them to the TW namespace, though hopefully not for long), add the following to the transwiki log:

WIKIPEDIAARTICLENAME ~

...which makes:

 * WIKIPEDIAARTICLENAME  imported → Transwiki:WIKIPEDIAARTICLENAME SB_Johnny  | talk 10:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Cookbook articles can be imported directly into the cookbook namespace, so use:

WIKIPEDIAARTICLENAME ~

...which makes:

 * WIKIPEDIAARTICLENAME  imported → Cookbook:WIKIPEDIAARTICLENAME SB_Johnny  | talk 11:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Then, on the page itself, add:

That adds 3 templates to the page: dewikify, bookify, and tw-adopt. Those templates contain categories for specific cleanup tasks, and can be removed as each task is complete. For an example of what this looks like, see Transwiki:Link rot.

The cookbook already has a template for this, so use cookwork rather than twwp-2.

Note that bookify refers to local manuals of style... I know most books don't have them yet, but the Cookbook and A Wikimanual of Gardening do. Still working on that with Swift.

I need to make another one for the cookbook... will post it here shortly. -- SB_Johnny | talk 10:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I like these templates, good job! I think it might be a little confusing to remember all of them, and how they are used, so perhaps you should write them into the text of this proposal (along with all the other changes that I know you are dying to make). --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 13:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * After looking at the Twwp-2 template, I must admit, I think the three templates included would be better off being only one that describes all three things, making all three templates obsolete. Something like a transwiki template with one optional argument for the name of the project the contents came from, which would say "from another project" instead of "from " if no argument is given. I also think the two twwp and twwp-c templates could be made into one with an optional argument being where its located if not in the Transwiki namespace. If you don't mind I will do both things. --darklama 13:57, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I made a draft of the first to show what I'm talking about User:Darklama/Transwiki. The idea is once we decide what the policy is to include a summary of that in one template and include a link to this policy once agreed to and adopted. --darklama 15:26, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Whiteknight: all three templates are added automatically with Twwp-2, so that's all you need to remember.
 * Darklama: I like the idea of having them separate because you can break up the chore into 3 parts that way. Anyone can transwiki, for example (personally I find it a pleasantly zen-like chore), but you'd need a more experienced wikibookian to bookify and/or seat it in an existing book. What I'm hoping is that the talk pages of books can be used to announce them (i.e., someone familiar with what's here might know what book a TW belongs in, move it there, and announce it on the main talk page of the book). Adjusting it to the local MOS of the book in question might best be done by one of the principle authors, which will be a lot easier for them to do if someone's already dewikified it, categorized it, seated it in the TOC, etc. So no, I think combining the templates kinda defeats the purpose.
 * I'm pondering adding a link to our "dewikify" category from the "wikify" category page on wikipedia actually... the first few times I dewikified gave me a strange perverse pleasure, having wikified so many articles at wikipedia :). -- SB_Johnny | talk 20:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh BTW... wrote this offline at lunch today. I think we could do with a more detailed description and argument for dewikifying. SB_Johnny  | talk 21:04, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Well this policy should be about chores that needs to be done before moving out of the transwiki namespace as well as what gets placed into the Transwiki namespace. Then a template could be placed on them, that summerizes these chores and categorizes them for easy viewing. Once they leave the Transwiki namespace, I think there are already templates that exist that can be applied to them, so there should be no need to duplicate things. The section of the proposed policy about whats done after moving out of the Transwiki namespace, probably just needs to be a reminder of existing policies that apply. So we probably need to try to agree on what should or must be done before contents can be moved out of the transwiki namespace at a minimum. --darklama 21:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't think we should be in the business of telling people what they have to do before adopting an article into a book. I don't think we should be in the business of telling people how their books should be written. I don't think we need to micromanage the contribution styles of our voluntary contributors.
 * This policy should be about what an admin is supposed to do when they transwiki something. It might also be a good idea to have some discussion about whether something should be imported when a request is made. But we don't need to boss people around and tell them that they must do it this way, in this order, or else... -- SB_Johnny | talk 21:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Imported contents may not always meet existing criterias strictly and part of the idea I had in mind with this policy was a guide for contributors moving contents from Transwiki namespace into a new or existing book. Not restrictly what admins need to do, though that can be covered as well. If copy-pasting contents is no longer allowed then contributors need to know that. When moving pages out of the Transwiki namespace contributors need to know what probably needs to be make the contents be ok here, since either it didn't belong on the project it was on or may not fit in as is and if contributors are coming from a different project they may not be aware of these differences. --darklama 22:12, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * The order or how it gets done probably doesn't really mater. This is about what chores need to be done, so that admins aren't left having to do all the work, once imported. I'm not sure how things are currently done, the impression I get from what Whiteknight has said is that imported contents are generally more relaxed then usual so that in good faith contents have a chance to grow and flourish. I'm probably not explaining well what I am thinking. --darklama 22:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

reset tabs
Once the things are imported, they should just be treated like any other book or chapter: if they're not up to snuff, make them better. We don't need an imperative policy for that, we can just use templates and categories to attract attention to the weaknesses of the module. There's no need to make policy telling people what to do when a technical solution does the job just as well (if not better...the only imperitives involved here is that the admins must add the templates to things they import, which is pretty easy to do). If a new contributor comes along and is immediately told that they must do this or that, they won't be hanging around, period.

It doesn't matter if the chores are done in this order or that one. Three templates suggests three chores, which might end up being done by three users. Three steps instead of one invites contributors to just come by and help in a small way, without taking on a huge monster of a project all at once. Someone might come by and say "hey, I know a book that could use this material!" and move it to the book, without doing all the other things (he might not have time that day, ya know?), and that contribution is just as valuable as any other, because it's a contribution in good faith. Besides, what's the consequence? Do you propose that anyone who moves a transwiki to the main namespace without first dewikifying be blocked? If that were the rule, I'd be outta here lickity-split.

Wikibooks is staffed by volunteers. Small things matter, and small things are more likely to be accomplished if volunteers aren't obligated to do everything at once. Three templates, rather than one, lets someone just come on by and fix something small, and reward themselves by removing one of the ugly template messages. When they remove the template, they'll take the module out of the category. When it's out of the category (dewikify, for example), people interested in doing that particular chore (again, dewikifying, for example) will just perform it on another module that needs it.

"Ask not what wikibooks can do for you, but what you can do for wikibooks." Good slogan. Let's make them small things. If they want to do all three things, then they can have the extra-big pleasure of removing all three templates.

"This is what you must do if you want to be a wikibookian." Bad slogan. Not my kind of party, I think I'll go elsewhere. -- SB_Johnny | talk 22:46, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * No I'm not proposing that anyone who doesn't dewikify it first be blocked. The only suggesting really I have is that contents be should be moved to a new or existing book before contributing heavly to it, so that Transwiki namespace doesn't become the contents permanent home, least it go unnoticed by all but a few people and stagnate, I'm suggesting it be made clear its about transitioning from the Transwiki namespace to a more permanent home, unless I'm compleatly wrong about the Transwiki namespace. --darklama 23:03, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I would agree with that last point: The transwiki space is just a holding tank for material in transition, it is not a permanent home to the material. Pages in the transwiki namespace should not be edited really, except to move the content to a more appropriate location. Consider the analogy of a warehouse with a storage area (the main module namespace), and a loading dock (the transwiki namespace). We unload the trucks at the loading dock, but we open the boxes, take inventory, and store the boxes in the warehouse. Likewise, the transwiki space should only be used for holding page until a suitable home can be found.
 * That said, I think the argument over whether to include 3 cleanup-templates, or 1 cleanup template is irrelevant. The fact is that imported modules need to be made less like wikipedia articals and more like wikibooks modules. Also, once a page has been imported, it can be merged into an appropriate book long before it ever has to be reformatted to match the MOS or the LMOS.
 * Last, the transwiki namespace is a place for performing non-glamorous administrative tasks. People who don't know what they are doing, or why they are doing it, should not be monkeying around in those pages. I don't think that there is any reason why we shouldn't mandate a certain proceedure, although I will conceed that such a proceedure should probably be kept minimal. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 00:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I think giving information to help people so they know what needs to be done can go a long way twords turning someone whose doesn't know what it is they are doing or why they are doing it and are just monkeying around into an enlighten contributor who can help ease the burden of administrators by doing what needs to be done. --darklama 00:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't really think the content/style/condition of the modules are really an administrative issue. One thing I hope we don't see (if I'm understanding correttly) is having links made from one transwiki page to another (i.e. actually building the book in that namespace).
 * I'm going to try thinning down the dewikify template though... it's too long, but not long enough. I'm trying to make the process of and reasons for dewikification on the Dewikify page, which might be suitable as a guideline. Bookify is a little trickier, and adopting is probably the trickiest of all, because it takes some work to get to know the style and flow of the book something is being placed into. -- SB_Johnny | talk 11:15, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I wasn't trying to suggest they are an administrative issue. The transition of Transwiki is a two stage process the administrative and contributor stages. I'm suggesting this policy or guideline, should cover both stages. I don't think there's probably a need to have a seperate policy on Dewikifing and Bookifing thats not already covered by some existing policy. The administrative stage consists of importing the pages and the contributor stage consists of doing any clean up chores and moving the page as part of a new or existing book, whether the clean up is done before or after the page is moved as part of a new or existing book, I think is what we might be disagreeing on whether there needs to be a specific order to it or not. I think SBJohnny is view is that it shouldn't mater and shouldn't try to dictate specific requirements and Whiteknight is willing to conceed having minimal requirements. I was going somewhere in the middle not quiet requirements or trying to specify a specific order, but inform contributors of tasks that will need to be done as a reminder of existing policies and guidelines. If admins are responsible for putting cleanup template(s) on the pages once imported that helps, but why not describe it in detail here?

 * We could have something like:

This transwikied page needs cleanup. see this page's discussion page for more information. --darklama 13:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

reset tab
I made some more adjustments to my template idea to reflect the direction I'm suggesting the three templates go in being combind. --darklama 13:26, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Put it to a vote before you start undoing anything I did. I've given the reasons for the 3 templates, sussinctly, and you haven't given any reason for not using it that way. -- SB_Johnny | talk 13:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I wasn't going to undo anything unless its agreed to. As for the reasons:
 * 1 template is easier to remember then 3.
 * reply: it's all in one template: (go back and read above)
 * remembering to look in 1 category is easier then 3.
 * looking at 1 policy page for description of the cleanup chores is easier then 3.
 * reply: There's only one category to remember: Category:Transwiki-related cleanup (go back and read above)
 * 3 difference templates creates more work not less.
 * being able to provide a reason rather then a stocked reason, allows admins to say specifically what they think needs done. a default reason could still be provided though, so that a custom reason is optional, if you wish. right now by default it says "no reason given" if a reason isn't provided.
 * reply: Again, using three allows a user to take care of one task at a time, then "check things off" by removing the template. (go back and read above)

 * reply: How would "checking things off" differ having just one template then having three? They would have to edit twwp-2 to remove the other templates as things are done which would effect other pages using them as well. One template could provide the info needed with something like stages
 * Argh! twwp-2 is substituted. when it's added to the page (using subst), the only thing left there are the 3 templates, so they can be moved one by one. Add it to a sandbox and you'll see how subst: works. (better yet, add it once with subst, and once without). SB_Johnny | talk 14:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Oh I see. I misunderstood how subst works then. I didn't realize that subst itself gets replaced. That takes care of how one would be able to check things off without having to edit twwp-2 itself. So I guess my only suggesting now is trying to make the three seperate templates more uniform so they are like a checklist in one box in which you just remove the individual parts and to make all 3 templates smaller. --darklama 14:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

--darklama 14:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

reset tabs again
Yeah, it would be nice if we could find a "checkbox icon" or something for them. That's why I wanted to shrink down the dewikify template too, since it's just too big. I'll try to work some more on Dewikify later (please just wait for me to do it... I want to finish my thought there). SB_Johnny | talk 14:56, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Good news. There is a checkbox icon already and an X too. I've seen them used on the talk pages of C++ Programming.

--darklama 15:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Cool... though is there one that has just a box looking like it needs to be checked? I had also thought of a broom and dustpan, etc... I think wikipedia has some icons along those lines that we could pilfer. SB_Johnny  | talk 15:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I couldn't find one unchecked. I searched here, commons and wikipedia. Maybe you could modify this one and upload it?
 * [[Image:UI-Checkbox.png]] --darklama 16:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Oh BTW... if you want to do one of your magic tricks, make an account on wikipedia, make a sandbox, and use on the page (no subst:), and you'll see a very ineresting message that comes up. I have no idea how they do that, but you might be able to figure it out. :) -- SB_Johnny  | talk 15:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I think I figured it out without registering an account and giving it a try. It does some page name comparecent with and without subst being used and displays a little error box if you didn't use subst. Is that what you want to do with those templates here? --darklama 16:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * hmmm, maybe I'm thinking of a different tag. the one I'm thinking of says in really large, red letters that you should have used the subst: (definitely gets the message across!). It might be handy for a template like this where not substing can cause problems. BTW, did you see the wacky AfD process there (with the 3 templates)? They recently changed them to do a "preloaded debate", which is neat. I don't do a lot of AfD nominations there, so haven't done it in a while. -- SB_Johnny | talk 16:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * The red letter ones was the one I was talking about. No I didn't see the AfD process there with the 3 templates. I saw mention of "preloaded debate", but have no idea what it means. --darklama 19:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Seems to be working well
Swing Dancing seems to be a good test case... the user who asked for the imports had apparently been the primary author on wikipedia, and then ran afoul of the how-to patrollers on wp. Since the new copy-to-wikibooks template (on wp) now links to our WB:RFI, he knew to list all the pages there. Now he's here (and busy!)... a new wikibookian and a new book.

The three template thing seems to be intuitive as well, as he's been removing them one by one as he does each step :).

If anyone hasn't voted for the bug on bugzilla, please do so... moving the thing to transwiki and then going back and deleting the original actually takes more time than the actual importing :/. -- SB_Johnny | talk 21:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * First off, do you have the link to the bugzilla request? I dont know where it was put last. Also, I like the 3 template thing as well. It might look a little ugly on the page ((wikify is awfully verbose), but it is highly functional. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 21:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * The link on the bugzilla request is http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7613 the last post there (after Robert chimed in...thanks Robert!) implied that it will be enabled soon, but an extra vote can't hurt :).
 * I'm going to shorten the dewikify template right now... linking to Dewikify. I've finished my thoughts on that page, if I missed anything, let me know (though please please please don't even mention that we have policies about it, because (a) we don't, and (b) I'd rather keep it as an explanation of why it's done rather than a "you must do this"). -- SB_Johnny | talk 23:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Changed now (modified all 3 actually, using the green checkmark and centering the text. See Swing_Dancing/Jazz_dance_moves for how it looks. -- SB_Johnny | talk 23:31, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

which comes first?
The last step is working on it, then moving to the mainspace. Can't we move first, then work on it? Kayau (talk | email | contribs) 12:55, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

 * I'll admit that when you've been here a while, you don't always bother to look back at the pages that originally defined how things work. Looking at this page and based on my actual experience, I'd say that those final two steps are not always in that order.  If it's a standalone page requested with no destination specified, it will usually be left in the transwiki namespace and worked on there, but if the requester specifies a destination, the person importing will move it to that location first before the requester begins work. – Adrignola talk 15:04, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Question on importing (Priority:LOW)
What is the difference between attribution only and full history ? It seems that there is a trade off between conciseness and legal compliance which in some cases would suggest that attribution may be more useful, and in others a detailed history of edits would be advantageous. For instance, potentially controversial...Also, wonder if there is a way in which admins can flag an import request as approved, but, in view of that they are busy, the import could then be implemented by anyone with importer privileges on their account? I have no problem being helpful to people who have devoted some of their valuable time to help me, answer my questions or fix my bloopers, but I would not take it upon myself to deign to approve or disapprove RfI.

title: Help talk:Importing


text:
The Computer Revolution/Chapter 1

How Computers Work: 3 Key components

1. The purpose of the Computer: - Basically to turn raw data into useful information

Data: consists of the raw facts and figures that are processed into information, i.e., the votes for a presidential election, which are used to decide who has won.

Information: is data that has been summarized or otherwise manipulated for use in decision making.

2. The difference between Hardware and Software.....

Hardware: consists of all the machinery and equipment in a computer system, i.e. the mouse, monitor, hard drive, keyboard etc

Software: "programs" all the electronic instructions that tell the computer how to perform a task. Such as a CD ROM, with instructions and or setup programs.

3. The basic Operations of a Computer:

 * Input operation: Is whatever is put into the computer system
 * Processing operation: The manipulation a Data into information
 * Storage operation: "memory"
 * Primary Storage- holds data waiting to be processed
 * Secondary Storage- Refers to devices that store data/info permanently

4. Output Operation: Basically what the results of processing, usually info

5. Communications operation: Online Communications, email, MSN, etc.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: The Computer Revolution/Chapter 1


text:
The Computer Revolution/Chapter 2

Internet Connections

 * Telephone
 * Pluses- Inexpensive available everywhere
 * Minuses- Slow, connection only supports only a single user

 * ISDN
 * Pluses- Faster than Dial-Up,, uses conventional phone lines
 * Minuses- More expensive than dial up, no longer supported by phone companies for single users, mostly uses by small businesses

 * DSL
 * Pluses- Can support many users, uploads faster than cable
 * Minuses- Needs to be close to phone switching station, limited choice of service providers, supports only a single user

 * T1 line
 * Pluses- reliable high speed downloading and uploading, you can talk and transmit at the same time
 * Minuses- Expensive best for businesses

 * Cable Modem
 * Pluses- Fast, always on, broadband connections, downloads faster than DSL
 * Minuses- Slower service during peak periods, vulnerable to outside intrusion, limited choices of providers, not always available to businesses

 * Satellite
 * Pluses- Wireless, fast, reliable, always on, goes where DSL and Cable cant
 * Minuses-High setup and monthly costs, must have unobstructed view of southern sky

 * Wi-Fi
 * Pluses- uses a beefed up version of the current cellphone network, ultimately should be available everywhere
 * Minuses- Range of access is usually only 50-300 feet (to access point)

 * 3G
 * Pluses- Functions like Wi-Fi but without the need for hot spots, uses existing cellphone network
 * Minuses- Low Battery power on some models, phones are relatively large

title: The Computer Revolution/Chapter 2


text:
Talk:Cell Biology/Energy supply/Glycolysis

Robinson0120 I saw the glycolysis section was a little lacking, so I redid the page and added in some information. I was going to try to get a chart to help with the explanation (namely the one from my textbook, which is very good), but I'm going to have to get permission to use it, so for now this is the glycolysis section.


text:
Talk:Write Yourself a Scheme in 48 Hours/Evaluation, Part 2

This seems a bit out of order - we're only told to add car,cdr, cons etc. to the primitives list after we're told to compile and test their use

eq? and equality predicates
The statement that "For our purposes, eq? and eqv? are basically the same: they recognize two items as the same if they print the same, and are fairly slow." doesn't make sense to me. In fact, in Scheme eq? is basically pointer equality (i.e. object identity) and is very fast. It sounds to me like the author has confused eq? and equal?.

Also I know the author has already disclaimed the Scheme developed here's relation to standard Scheme, but the behaviour of "equal?" seen here is also very different to the standard equal? behaviour - consistently, in keeping with the weak typing of this Scheme. For instance  will certainly not return   in standard Scheme, even though these values "could be interpreted the same way" - that's not the job of. Amoe (discuss • contribs) 08:55, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Source code pragma
As an alternative to adding the -fglasgow-exts to the compiler call, it should be noted that one can add the pragma to the source code:

{-# OPTIONS_GHC -fglasgow-exts #-}

This has the advantage that the user need not remember which flags are needed to compile it. and that the source is basically "documented" as using an extension.

Conditionals: Pattern Matching 2
This might seem too obvious to some, but perhaps it would be worthwhile to add a parenthetical note before or after the code block for the if-clause evaluator clarifying, or reminding the reader, that it needs to be added before the earlier  matcher (since it's our catch-all condition). I got tripped up on this for a bit before the kind folks over at #haskell pointed me in the right direction. --23:29, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


text:
Accountancy/Cost Flow Assumptions

=Cost Flow Assumptions=
 * Cost flow assumptions affect the more important Income Statement and less important Balance Sheet
 * Assume that the most recent cost is most relevant cost

Specific Identification

 * Keeps track of the cost of each, specific good sold

The Good

 * Perfect matching of costs of goods to goods sold

The Bad

 * Often impossible or too costly
 * Allows manipulation by management

FIFO

 * First-In-First-Out
 * Assigns first costs incurred to COGS (Cost of Goods Sold) on the Income Statement

The Good

 * Disallows manipulation by management
 * Cost flow agrees with ideal, physical flow of goods
 * Counter-Argument – Agreement of cost flow and ideal, physical flow of goods is not important

The Bad

 * Uses the least relevant cost for the Income Statement
 * Underestimates or overestimates cost of goods sold if prices are rising or falling, respectively

LIFO

 * Last-In-First-Out
 * Assigns last costs incurred to COGS on the Income Statement

The Good

 * Disallows manipulation by management
 * Uses the most relevant cost for the Income Statement

The Bad

 * Underestimates or overestimates cost of goods sold if prices are falling or rising, respectively
 * Cost flow disagrees with ideal, physical flow of goods
 * Counter-Argument – Agreement of cost flow and ideal, physical flow of goods is not important

Weighted Average

 * Assigns average cost incurred to COGS on the Income Statement

The Good

 * Disallows manipulation by management
 * Better estimation of the cost of goods sold than FIFO or LIFO if prices are rising or falling

The Bad

 * Tends to ignore extreme costs of inventory
 * There is no theoretical reasoning for using this method

title: Accountancy/Cost Flow Assumptions


text:
User talk:Pathoschild

m:   :Pathoschild

title: User talk:Pathoschild


text: Dichterliebe/Aus meinen Tränen sprießen

title: Dichterliebe/Aus meinen Tränen sprießen


text:
Wikijunior:The Elements/Sodium

What does it look, feel, taste, or smell like?
Pure sodium is a soft and silvery metal. Sodium is prevented from contact with the air and water and kept by immersion in oil, because it tarnishes very quickly when exposed to air. It is so soft that you could cut it with a butter knife.

How was it discovered?
Sodium was isolated by Sir Humphrey Davy in 1807 from sodium hydroxide.

Where did its name come from?
Sodium gets its name from the English soda. In Latin it was called natrium.  Did You Know?
 * Sodium is the sixth most abundant element overall.
 * Sodium is the most abundant alkali metal, in the first column of the periodic table.
 * Sodium ions taste salty in flavor.

Where is it found?
The most common compound of sodium is sodium chloride, better known as salt, which can be found in seawater and in the mineral halite. Sodium is relatively common in stars. Because sodium is highly reactive, it is never found in its pure state in nature.

What are its uses?
We use sodium every day. Sodium chloride is used to help flavor food in the form of table salt. Sodium is also found in sodium bicarbonate, also called baking soda. Sodium is also used in most soaps and detergents (although some, such as those in shaving cream, use potassium instead.)

Sodium is also required by the body for proper blood, brain cell action, heart activity, and more. It is so important that animals and people are adapted to tasting sodium. Sodium is salty.

Is it dangerous?
Sodium is highly reactive and may ignite on contact with water. It can even cause an explosion. The strong alkali sodium hydroxide — also called lye — is very corrosive and should never be touched, as it can cause severe chemical burns; neither should solutions of it.

title: Wikijunior:The Elements/Sodium


text:
SimCity and Urban Planning

This book is a guide to the casual learner about how Will Wright's popular game SimCity relates to urban planning and how concepts were utilized in the game.

Urban planning is a profession of city and regional governments that addresses the need to effectively plan for new development or redevelopment in an urban area. Today in almost all developed countries, it is commonly applied to any type of formal land development whether it it be in the rural country, suburbia, or downtown. SimCity simulates this profession by giving the tools necessarily to "create cities" such as zoning for land uses, plotting roads, and shaping the landscape.

SimCity takes planning a step further by giving the player control of the city budget, unlimited bulldozing power (eminent domain), and no legal hurdles. In essence the game captures the functions of city government, not just urban planning. However the basis on which the city can grow and the game's programming of what grows or doesn't, is heavily based in planning policy and theories of economic development.

Table of contents

 * /Preface/
 * /Introduction/
 * /Basic Concepts/
 * Taxation and Fiscal Management
 * /Building Transportation/
 * /Zoning/
 * /Municipal Infrastructure/
 * /Environment/
 * /Natural Disasters/
 * /Bibliography/
 * /Glossary/
 * Authors and Contributors

Read more

 * SimCity
 * SimEarth

title: SimCity and Urban Planning


text: MySQL/Print version

title: MySQL/Print version


text:
ICT in Education

Table of Contents

 * /Preface/
 * /Introduction/
 * /Definition of Terms/
 * /The Promise of ICTs in Education/
 * /The Uses of ICTs in Education/
 * /Issues in the Use of ICTs in Education/
 * /Key Challenges in Integrating ICTs in Education/
 * /For Further Reading/
 * /About the Author/
 * /Notes/

Information
This book is donated by UNDP Asia-Pacific Development Information Programme (UNDP-APDIP) to the community. The original publication by:

Author: Victoria L. Tinio

© UNDP-APDIP, 2003, 32 pages

is located at http://www.apdip.net/publications/iespprimers/eprimer-edu.pdf

This wikibook is available under the terms of GNU Free Documentation License and Creative Commons Attribution License 2.5

title: ICT in Education


text:
MediaWiki Administrator's Handbook/Importing

Special:Import is a feature designed to accompany Special:Export. Importing allows manual or automated copying of a page from a remote project into another project. This is not necessarily available on all wikis.

If the feature is disabled on a particular wiki the page will instead say "No transwiki import sources have been defined and direct history uploads are disabled." If it is available, however, importing will have one of two appearances:

Importing from transwiki import sources

This is the interface used on Wikimedia projects (other than those that still have it disabled entirely). For this interface, choose the one-letter code that represents the project to import from (w = Wikipedia, b = Wikibooks, etc.); the ones listed will depend on what projects have been added as import sources. Projects that do not have their codes on this list cannot be imported from. Next, enter the page name. Only one page can be imported at a time using this interface. Talk pages are not automatically included and must be imported separately. Unchecking "Copy all history versions for this page" will result in only the current revision being carried across (similar to Special:Export's "Include only the current revision, not the full history" feature). "Transfer pages into namespace:" allows you to choose a namespace; for a page that needs cleanup, using the Transwiki namespace, if there is one, is probably a good idea.

In the case of Wikimedia projects, the projects from which imports can be made must be specifically requested from bugzilla. The following Wikimedia wikis have automated importing enabled.
 * en.Wikibooks: Imports from en.Wikipedia
 * en.Wikiversity: Imports from en.Wikibooks, en.Wikipedia, en.Wikiquote, en.Wikisource and beta.Wikiversity
 * en.Wiktionary: Imports from en.Wikipedia

Importing from XML

Used on many wikis, this interface is less automated but more powerful. Pages must first be obtained from the source wiki's Special:Export. This variant of the interface does not feature a "Copy all history versions for this page" checkbox; this must instead be done with Special:Export's "Include only the current revision, not the full history" checkbox. Use "Browse..." to select the saved XML file and then click "Upload File" to begin the upload. The time this takes will vary depending on the size of the XML, how busy the server is, and your Internet connection speed. If all goes well it will say "Import succeeded!", and if not the error message will indicate what went wrong.

Unlike the Wikimedia version pages cannot be directed into a new namespace from this interface, however it can be manually changed with a text editor; for example if there is a "News:" namespace on the target wiki, changing the  entry "Foo" to "News:Foo" will automatically direct it into the "News:" namespace.

General Notes

 * pages in the File: namespace can be imported, but the images attached to them can't (although if it is a Wikimedia project and they are on Wikimedia Commons they will automatically be sourced from there).
 * pages are automatically attributed to users with the same username. Note that if a user has been renamed with Special:Renameuser and an edit under their old username is subsequently imported it will be attributed to the old username, not their new one.
 * If you import to a page name that already exists the most recent revision of the now merged history will be the one displayed, so be sure to check the pages to make sure a wanted revision hasn't been replaced.
 * when importing from an import source the action is logged on Special:Log/import (both where the XML came from, and how many revisions were imported) and the action shows up on Special:Recentchanges. XML imports are also logged, but only in MediaWiki 1.9.x. With earlier builds means the page won't show up on Special:Recentchanges unless it is more recently edited than some of the wiki's current content. Note that neither method logs the page on Special:Newpages unless its oldest revision is newer than some of the wiki's own content.
 * Sometimes the Special:Log/import logging will fail to register an imported page. Additionally, some projects maintain manual transwiki logs (usually in a Transwiki: namespace).
 * when using Special:Export, always check the very bottom of the XML. If the last line isn't, don't use it.
 * if you import XML of a page that has already been imported there will be duplicate revisions in the history. This may or may not apply to the transwiki import sources method.
 * by default, the XML importing version of the interface limits filesizes to around 1.4 megabytes. This limit can be changed by the server admin (or you in php.ini in maxuploadsize=).


text:
User talk:Vinitb4u

Hello and welcome to Wikibooks!

Here are some tips to help you get started:
 * You can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~.
 * Remember to conduct any editing experiments in the sandbox.
 * Check out our help page if you need additional help.
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Take a look at Naming policy
 * See list of templates which can save your time
 * Remember to maintain a Neutral point of view.
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and have fun!

You will find more resources in Community Portal. If you want to ask a question, visit the Study help desk, the Staff lounge, IRC channel or ask me personally on my talk page.

Good luck!  M in un  ''Spiderman 10:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Vinitb4u


text:
Cookbook:Quince Pudding

This quince pudding recipe originates from the 1881 Household Cyclopedia.

Ingredients

 * Quinces
 * Sugar
 * Ground ginger
 * Ground cinnamon
 * 1 pint cream
 * 3–4 ea. egg yolks

Procedure

 * 1) Scald quinces until tender.
 * 2) Skin them and scrape the pulp into a mixing bowl.
 * 3) Blend the pulp with sugar until very sweet. Add ginger and cinnamon to taste.
 * 4) Combine the cream and eggs. Stir this into the quince pulp until thick.
 * 5) Butter a pudding-pan or other baking dish. Pour in the quince-cream mixture.
 * 6) Bake until firm but still slightly wobbly in the centre. Remove from oven and leave till set.

title: Cookbook:Quince Pudding


text:
Cookbook:Green Turtle Soup

Turtle soup is a soup made from the flesh of the turtle, often the green turtle or, especially in the United States, the snapping turtle, in which case it is commonly referred to as snapper soup (not to be confused with red snapper soup, which is made from the fish called a red snapper).

This recipe is adapted from

Forcemeat (optional)

 * 6 tablespoons finely-chopped turtle meat
 * 2 hard-boiled egg yolks
 * 1 tablespoon butter
 * Oyster juice/liquor (optional)
 * Ground cayenne pepper
 * Ground mace
 * ½ teaspoon sugar
 * 1 pinch salt
 * 2 eggs
 * Cracker crumbs

Soup

 * 1 whole turtle, cleaned
 * 2 onions
 * 1 bunch of sweet herbs
 * Brown flour
 * 1 lemon, juiced
 * 1 glass of Madeira wine

Forcemeat (optional)

 * 1) Rub the minced turtle, yolks, butter, oyster liquor, cayenne, mace, sugar, and salt together to make a paste.
 * 2) Mix in one of the eggs.
 * 3) Shape the mixture into small balls. Dip in egg, then cracker crumbs.
 * 4) Pan-fry in butter.

Soup

 * 1) After removing the entrails, cut up the coarser parts of the turtle meat and bones. Separate out the finer meat.
 * 2) Place the coarse turtle in a pot with the onions, herbs, pepper, and salt. Cover with 4 quarts (4 liters) water, and simmer for 4 hours. Strain the broth, and discard the solids.
 * 3) Simmer the finer turtle meat and the green fat for 1 hour in 2 quarts of water.
 * 4) If there are eggs in the turtle, simmer them for 4 hours in water.
 * 5) Reheat the broth in a pot, and add the fine turtle meat. Thicken with brown flour, and simmer gently for 1 hour.
 * 6) Add the simmered eggs and/or forcemeat, lemon juice, and wine.
 * 7) Serve hot.

Notes, tips, and variations

 * Green turtle can be purchased preserved in air-tight cans.
 * Some cooks add the finer meat before straining, boiling all together five hours; then strain, thicken and put in the green fat, cut into lumps an inch long. This makes a handsomer soup than if the meat is left in.

title: Cookbook:Green Turtle Soup


text:
Cookbook:Turkish Delight

| Cuisine of Turkey

Turkish delight, or lokum (also loukoum), is a confection made from starch and sugar. It is often flavored with rosewater or lemon, the former giving it a characteristic pale pink color. It has a soft, sticky consistency, and is often packaged and eaten in small cubes that are dusted with sugar to prevent sticking. Some recipes include small nut pieces, usually pistachio, hazelnut or walnuts.

Ingredients

 * 2 cups white granulated sugar
 * ½ cup cornstarch
 * 1½ cup water
 * ½ tsp cream of tartar
 * 2 tbsp rosewater
 * Food coloring
 * ½ cup chopped toasted pistachios or almonds (optional)
 * Icing sugar, granulated sugar, or desiccated coconut for dusting

Procedure

 * 1) Combine sugar, 1 cup water, cream of tartar, and flavoring(s) in a small saucepan and bring to a boil.
 * 2) Boil over medium-low heat for 20-30 minutes, until the mixture reaches "firm-ball," or 250°F (120°C) on a candy thermometer.
 * 3) In a separate bowl, combine cornstarch with ½ cup hot water, mix completely, and slowly stir into sugar mixture.
 * 4) Stir constantly until mixture is evenly combined. Continue to stir on low heat until mixture thickens and becomes clearer.
 * 5) Apply non-stick cooking spray to a form (heat-safe ice cube trays will do nicely, though not plastic ones), shallow pie pan, or jelly-roll pan.
 * 6) Pour the thickened hot mixture into the pan or form and allow to set.
 * 7) When cool, release from form or cut into cubes as applicable and roll each piece in powdered sugar, granulated sugar, or coconut.
 * 8) Store at room temperature in airtight container.

Notes, tips, and variations

 * With the exception of the sugar, cornstarch, water, cream of tartar, and cooking technique, this recipe may be greatly altered according to taste and/or occasion. The nuts may be omitted, and various flavorings can be added.

 * Try replacing the rosewater with one of the following:
 * ½ tsp rose food flavoring
 * ¼ cup fruit juice
 * 1 tbsp vanilla extract
 * 1 tbsp orange extract
 * 1 tbsp Crème de menthe liqueur

Warnings

 * There is a potential danger in adding the water/cornstarch mix into the hot sugar mix in phase 3 of the recipe. Adding a cold liquid to hot sugar can cause rapid vaporization of the water which can lead to the pan boiling over almost explosively, possibly causing serious burns. This can be avoided by heating the water/cornstarch mix and mixing it slowly while it's hot. Never add cold liquids into boiling sugar mixtures!

title: Cookbook:Turkish Delight


text:
Cookbook talk:Turkish Delight

Page title
To the anonymous creator of this page:

I apologise if I have missed something that is obvious, and caused you to lose work. At first glance the content of the new Lokum page was identical to the content of the Loukoumi page. On closer examination, there seemed to be som superficial changes to the first paragraph to adapt the article to the new page name. Seeing no particular reason to have two essentially identical articles under different names, I erased the content of the new page and made it a redirect to the original page.

After you replaced the contents, I made a more careful comparison between the versions I based my original decision on, and found that you had also made some helpful edits to the content of the Lokum page. But none of them seemed to distinguish Lokum from Loukoumi. In other words, these helpful edits would be equally helpful to the existing Loukoumi page.

If you have future plans to distinguish Lokum from Loukoumi, please leave a mesage here so that I, and others who might do as I did, will understand.

If you are trying to improve upon the Loukoumi page, please simply edit that page. There is no need for a separate page in that cirsumstance.

Finally, you might be pleased to know that your work is not really "lost". Every version of every article is saved in its entirety in the associated Page History. It can easily be copied/pasted to a new edit of the page, reverting the page back to the version which I removed. See How to revert a page to an earlier version.

Thank you,

-Rholton 02:24, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I now see that you have made the page Loukoumi into a redirect to Lokum. This does resolve the issue of having two virtually identical pages. In the future, you can accomplish the same thing by "moving" (think renaming) the original page to the new name. This will automatically copy the contents from the old to the new, and make the old a redirect to the new. More importantly, it will preserve the revision history of the page as a unified whole. See How to rename (move) a page

As you may have guessed by now, I am not knowledgeable in the topic of this article. I am only interested in the standards and practices that have been recogized by the Wikipedia community. If you have not familiarized yourself with them, please see Welcome, newcomers.

Again, thank you for your contributions.

 * -Rholton 02:55, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This is English wikipedia. We should use the common English name, which is Turkish delight Mintguy (T) 03:05, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

original?
Portions of this page were lifted from an article in "Skylife," the in-flight magazine of Turkish Airlines.

http://www.atamanhotel.com/delight.html

Dating Ambiguity?
There seems to be some confusion on the date that Lokum was created:

In 1776, during the reign of Sultan Abdul Hamid I, Bekir Effendi, a fully apprenticed confectioner ...

The History of lokum dates back to 500 years, making it one of the oldest sweets in the world.

Which is it: 230 years old or 500 years old?

Contradiction
The dating contradiction exists because the author created the article by swiping sections from other web pages. If you google the "500 years" segment of the article you see it, word for word, in several other places. The more recent date comes from the magazine article I already mentioned.

Recipe error
The recipe given in this article was taken from one of several other websites, and all copies have the same error. The previous version called for 2 tb of cornstarch, as opposed to the correct 1/2 c. The error has been corrected; if you tried this recipe before and it didn't work, this is probably the reason.

Also, the cooking time is off by as much as twenty minutes. The Lokum needs to cook to about 245-250°F (118-121°C; "Firm Ball" stage) before it is allowed to cool. Overcooking it will make it hard, and undercooking it will make it runny.

Finally, the original recipe left out a number of variations for flavoring. "True" Lokum is indeed flavored with rosewater, but several other flavors (listed in the recipe) may be used.

June 1

 * Support Common name. Primary topic disambiguation. Jooler 20:44, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Turkish Delight often refers to the beverage Salep, as well as other uses. Jonathunder 04:19, 2005 Jun 3 (UTC)
 * That actually appears to be an error. See the talk page for Talk:Turkish Delight Quoting the Salep article "The beverage salep is sometimes referred to as Turkish Delight, though that name is also used for lokum. As Turkish Delight, salep is mentioned in the Chronicles of Narnia series by C.S. Lewis when Edmund Pevensie requests some of the hot beverage from the White Witch in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe." - "I think in the The Chonicles of Narnia the Turkish Delight refers to Lokum, because Edmund gets a hot beverage and Turkish Delight". (anon) - Jooler 06:38, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Obviously, if the comment to Jonathunder has convinced him that the move is right, then it can be moved. As it stands there is no consensus for the move. violet/riga (t) 19:22, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, I assume it's too late to weigh in, but I would be for moving it as well. --Iustinus 28 June 2005 06:44 (UTC)

 * Raise the issue on requested moves again. Jooler 28 June 2005 06:52 (UTC)

 * OK, I've now done so, and am starting a new section. --Iustinus 28 June 2005 07:53 (UTC)

June 28

 * Support. The candy is called "Turkish delight" in English, and while that expression has other meanings, they are comparatively rare. Move this article to Turkish delight with or a disambiguating list at the top. --Iustinus 28 June 2005 07:52 (UTC)

 * Support. As pointed out above, the references to Turkish Delight meaning some kind of drink appear to be erroneous, unless anyone can confirm this. Jooler 28 June 2005 18:24 (UTC)

 * Support. If you trawl the web it's not hard to find factoids about "Turkish Delight" sometimes referring to the beverage. However, they typically reference Lewis. I've yet to find anyone actually using "Turkish Delight" to mean salep-the-beverage. To date no one's presented any evidence (Lewis aside) that this is ever done. Possibly confusing the issue is that I believe that salep-the-flour can actually be the source of the starch for lokum. -TM

 * Support, per above. --Jpbrenna 1 July 2005 06:22 (UTC)

 * Support -- Turkish delight is the English name (and Lewis is talking about the candy as well, for what it's worth--I'm surprised so many readers get confused about this--see the talk on the current Turkish delight disambigulation for quotes.). --Marlow4 6 July 2005 00:16 (UTC)

Politics
I am so sick of this page being a front in the cultural battle between the Greeks and the Turks. It's just candy, people. But I guess there's nothing we can really do about it :( --Iustinus 3 July 2005 05:46 (UTC)

 * I guess this comment is tongue-in-cheek? No battle exists. Jonathunder raised the only objection, which seems to have nothing supporting it. It's been a month without a peep from him/her. Why not just move it? -TM

 * No, it was serious, but wasn't directly related to the name-change vote. A recent edit was made for the sole purpose of moving "Greek" to the end, and "Turkish" to the begining. Back when this WAS at Turkish delight someone changed it to Greek delight. Let alone all the edits to switch back and forth between Greek and Turkish as the language that originated this word. Or the fool who changed the interwiki link lucumium to lucumi apparently just to make it closer to the Modern Greek form. And so on and so on ad infinitum.
 * We may be opening a can of worms by moving this back to the proper title. ;) --Iustinus 6 July 2005 09:12 (UTC)
 * In Greece, it is sold as "Greek Delight," just as the Greek Key is not called that in Turkey. Both the Greeks and the Turks can feel very strongly on the issue, however, it is most commonly known as Turkish in English, and I see no need to advance the cause of Turkish linguistic nationalism. Pelegius 01:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

It's Greek linguistic nationalism,you Greek.--85.97.76.234 16:37, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Which Cuisines
As it currently stands, the article says:
 * Though enjoyed worldwide, lokum is especially familiar in Turkish, Albanian, Bosnian, Bulgarian, Greek, Cypriot and Romanian cuisines.

Someone just added Bosnian. The list just keeps on growing, and I suspect (given the politics of that area) it will continue to do so. Would I be an ignorant American if I suggested that we simplify this to Greek, Turkish and "Balkan" cuisine? I suppose it might just annoy even more people. But I'd rather not have this article turn into a list of countries in the region where Turkish Delight is frequently eaten. --Iustinus 17:06, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
 * -I just happened upon the article and I noticed that Greece is no longer mentioned as one of the countries especially associated with Turkish Delight, so I put it back in. I considered simplifying the sentence by deleting Turkey and just saying "Mediterranean countries", but it didn't seem fair not to mention Turkey by name, seeing as that's the country of origin. I don't want to cause (or continue) a Turkey vs. Greece argument, but to not mention Greece at all is preposterous. -Alex
 * I agree. My intention wasn't for Greece to be removed, but to simplify the rest of the list. I realize Greece is, by some definitions, a Balkan country, but I think it does merit separate mention. Turkey cannot and should not be removed. In fact, my vote woudl be for no one to edit this list at all, unless they have a really good reason ;) --Iustinus 08:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Let's say it Ottoman Cuisine

Narnia
Can someone tell me why the tiny mention of The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe is so controvercial that everyone keeps deleting or rewriting it? --Iustinus 08:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, I'm getting sick of this phenomenon. I'm inclined to keep the "Popular Culture" section, but not strongly so. However, I don't want it to keep getting deleted and then reinserted. So I've reinserted it myself, with a note saying not to delete the section unilaterally. If you want to erase that section, please bring it up on this page first, and see what other people think! --Iustinus 07:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Aplets & Cotlets
Someone, possibly with commercial intent, added a reference (and link) to Liberty Orchards. I have changed the phrasing slightly, but kept it because they do seem (to me at least) to be a noteworthy company. Perhaps someone could further improve the phrasing though, so that it's less of a commercial. --Iustinus 18:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Historical thickener?
I have seen recipes for this confection using pectin, cornstarch, and gelatin. None of these seem like the likely original thickening agents in the candies, at least not in their modern, boxed forms. Does anyone know what was used historically? The connection with rose flavoring suggests that perhaps the original may have been a rose hip jelly (pectin-based) that was flavored with rose water, but this is just a guess.

On second thought, the connection with salep (as mentioned in discussion above) suggests that the salep (also a source of starch-like polysaccharides) may have been the original thickener.

On third thought, GP4Kids states that the original was a cooked mixture of honey (of course, no processed sugar) citrus (a source of pectin) and rose water...Mschmidt62 02:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

According to hungrymonster.com Turkish Delight (Lokum) "was prepared in ancient Turkey by combining dates, honey, roses and jasmine and then it was bound together with gum arabic. Sometimes nuts are added into the mixture. " The "thickener" or binder was, then, gum arabic. MCushman 04:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Revert
I reverted this change Nonetheless, since lokum became popular Greeks started selling it under the name of Greek lokum so that a Greek made-up story of lokum should be expected. It was pov and was unsourced.--Dakota 07:17, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Turkish Delight
As a food expert, I cannot help but laugh at the comments which have been written. Guys chill out, this isn't a place for Nationaist chauvanist attitudes, its FOOD, its meant to bring understanding and show similarities, what on earth are you doing.Lets be honest, Turkish Delight is called Turkish Delight because it was invented by a Turk for the Ottoman Turks Sultan who requested a soft sweet be made for him, as the legend says. Turkish Delight as we know it hence, was created by this guy so I don't see the issue or crisis in calling it by this name, its just a historical fact, if a Greek had invented it, then we would have called in Greek Delight. Here is it from the original creater, this family still produces authentic Turkish Delight, actually it is the best in the world, the original and a Food connoisseur's haven, it MUST be respected in the article.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE CHANGE THAT IMAGE, THE ONE WITH THE COLOURFULL COLOURS, ITS THAT KIND OF CHEAP TAT THAT PEOPLE MISTAKE FOR THE AUTHENTIC BEAUTY THAT IS TURKISH DELIGHT.

The Shop http://www.hacibekir.com.tr/yenidukkan.jpg (this link is broken) In the 18th century, after refined sugar became available in Turkey, Haci Bekir was the first confectioner to use sugar and cornstarch instead of grape molasses and flour, respectively, and its superlative taste and texture were obtained(but it is F!@#ing expensive for us poor middle--class turks - signed:A Turk). Lokum and akide (Turkish hard candy) became so famous that the Sultan appointed Haci Bekir "chief confectioner" to the Ottoman Court. In the 19th century a British traveler purchased a case of the confection known to Turks as "rahat lokum", or simply lokum, from Haci Bekir. He took it back to London where he called it Turkish Delight. Since then in English speaking countries and Europe it has been known as Turkish Delight, and its name was entered to World Confectionery literature. The original name lokum derives from the Arabic "rahat - ul hulkum" (literally soothing to the throat). The pronunciation was gradually corrupted in Turkish to "lat - i lokum" and finally just "lokum". Besides plain lokum it is also made containing hazelnuts, walnuts, almonds, pistachio nuts, clotted cream and dessicated coconuts. In addition, varieties of lokum flavored with strawberry, lemon, orange, mint, vanilla and rose petals are also available. For those who enjoy harder texture slightly overcooked lokum is a favourite. For over two hundred years words Haci Bekir and lokum have been used synonymously. Master Bekir Affandi came to Istanbul from Kastamonu in Anatolia, and opened his small shop at Bahcekapi in 1777 where he hand - made hard and soft candies.

"Arabesque" is a book published in London. In the chapter titled "Old Stamboul" it gives information about confectioner Bekir Affandi, his small shop and how he made and sold candies. It says "Anyone who has any pretensions to a knowledge of the Middle East should know Haci Bekir". Bekir Affandi became Haci Bekir after he went to Mecca on pilgramage. Soon after Haci Bekir began making candies fame of his products reached the Sultan, and he appointed him "Chief Confectioner" to the Ottoman Court. He was a master who kept up with new developments. When beet sugar and starch became available he was the first one to use them instead of grape molasses for sweetener and flour, respectively. Hard candy (akide) and Turkish Delight (Lokum) had long been known in Istanbul, but cleanliness of his shop and his recipes made his products outstanding and much sought after. A painting of Haci Bekir was made by Maltese artist Amedeo Preziosi who came to Istanbul in mid-nineteenth century, and is famous for his paintings of Istanbul. The original of the painting hangs in the Louvre Museum in Paris. A lithographic copy of it is at Topkapi Museum in Istanbul. After Haci Bekir passed away his son, Muhiddin, took over the shop and the title Chief Confectioner to the Palace. During his time the company was awarded a silver medal in Vienna (1873), another silver medal in Cologne (1888) and gold medals in Brussels (1897) and Paris (1906) fairs for excellent product quality. Under management of Ali, Muhiddin's son, the company prospered. In addition to several shops in Istanbul one was opened in Cairo and another in Alexandria, Egypt. In 1911 he was appointed confectioner to royal palace by his highness the Khedive of Egypt. Company's products were successfully exhibited and sold in New York Fair in 1939. Ali died in 1974. The company named after three generations; Ali Muhiddin Haci Bekir, is now run by the fourth and fifth generations together. Its production facilities and stores are all in Istanbul now. It has a thriving export business around the World. Bekir Affandi opened his confectionery shop in Istanbul at Bahcekapi near Galata Bridge over Golden Horn. In the same busy, commercial district were the train station connecting the city to Europe, fish market, Egyptian market (Misir Carsisi) and textile center. High level government offices, including that of prime minister's, were located at Bab-i Ali section of town, which was nearby. The original one - room shop of Bekir Affandi (later called confectioner Haci Bekir) began production in 1777. At the back of the shop stood a fireplace where lokum (Turkish Delight) was made. The shop was soon enlarged to 33 m2. Another shop next door was also added to it which brought its size to 88 m2. Since 1777 it has been serving as a confectionery shop under management of five generations of Haci Bekir family.

The shop was restored by Dogan Sahin, son - in - law of Ali Muhiddin Haci Beki, in 1989 to reflect its original features. Above the shop there are two storeys. Walls are plastered; wood frames are used; roof is covered with clay tiles. Parapets are old style Maltese stone. At the entrance there are two marble columns with brass collars. Front display windows are crossed above with marble blocks laid on two forged steel beams which are supported on cast iron columns in the middle. During restoration arched cooking section at the rear and chimney on the roof are kept as they were in the period of confectioner Haci Bekir. Also work benches, shelves, flower patterned shutters on ceiling are authentic. In the oldest part of the shop Preziosi's "Confectioner" painting could be visualized in three dimensions. Floor of the shop is marble. Original wood ceiling beams with planks and display window girders give a pretty good idea about construction methods in hundred year intervals. We are indebted to New York Times reporter Miss Marvine Howe for suggesting Dogan Sahin during her interview with him in 1983 renovation of the shop as a living museum. Thanks are also due Professor Mehmet Cubuk and his assistants at Mimar Sinan University for their help in implementing the project, and to members of the Committee for Protecting Cultural and Natural Assets for their encouragement http://www.hacibekir.com.tr/mainuk.html Here is the Legend: The story of the creation of Turkish Delight (lokum) begins in the late 1700s, when Ali Muhiddin Haci Bekir, confectioner to the imperial courrt in Istanbul, listens to the sultan rant: "Hard candy! I'm tired of hard candy!" the sultan growled as he cracked a tooth on yet another sourball. "I demand soft candy!" Ali Muhiddin Haci Bekir had come to the imperial capital of Istanbul from the Anatolian mountain town of Kastamonu in the late 1700s to hear his emperor's plea. His mountain-man blood rose! His face turned grim with conviction! He set his jaw with determination! He was going to take bold and decisive action! He marched into his confectioner's kitchen and thought up a recipe: he mixed water, sugar, corn starch, cream of tartar and rosewater, cooked it up, poured the mixture into a flat pan slicked with almond oil, and let it cool. Then he sprinkled it with powdered sugar, cut it into bite-sized chunks and...his hand trembling, his eyes bright with anticipation, his mind fraught with trepidation, his lips quivering to receive the morsel...he bit! What? No crack of candy crunched by his mighty alpine jaws? No shower of sugary splinters scattering through his oral cavity? Why, this new confection was soft and easy to chew, a pleasure, a treat for both palate and teeth! It was... it was...a comfortable morsel! Rahat lokum ("comfortable morsel"), nowadays called simply lokum, or Turkish Delight, was an instant hit, especially at the palace. Ali Muhiddin became a celebrity overnight as palace bigwhigs (or, more usually, their lackeys and gofers) traipsed down the hill from Topkapi Palace to Eminönü on the Golden Horn to buy boxes of Comfortable Morsels to thrill the jaded palates of Ottoman potentates. You can still buy lokum at Ali Muhiddin's shop in Eminönü today, almost 250 years since the intrepid confectioner saved his sultan from sourballs. It's on Hamidiye Caddesi at the corner of Seyhülislam Hayri Efendi Caddesi, two blocks east of the Yeni Cami (New Mosque). Over the centuries Ali Muhiddin's descendants (the shop is still owned by the family) fiddled with the recipe, adding good things like walnuts, pistachios, oranges, almonds, clotted cream, and of course chocolate. (The plain rosewater original is still a favorite, however.) Lokum (Turkish Delight) is now made and sold in thousands of shops throughout Turkey, and enjoyed with Turkish tea or coffee, or just by itself. johnstevens5 —Preceding unsigned comment added by johnstevens5 (discuss • contribs)

pics
There is not really a good reason to have to use fair use pics when we have perfectly acceptable GFDL ones. The story above is a nice legend, however, until it is referenced and proven, having pictures with captions claiming to to be the one and only inventor is POV. Seriously, even the text above states it is a legend. We can't favor that company because they claim to be the inventors. See WP:VERIFY. GFDL pics are much less of a legal issue, and are preferred. Please discuss here before making wholesale reversions. psch e  mp  |  talk  00:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, the reality is, what is called "Turkish Delight" was invented by Haci Bekir, this is not a Sweet which can be easily created or perfected, its the specialist work of sweet makers. Haci Bekir is the founder of this sweet, as he was a Turk and created it for the Sultan obviously its Turkish Delight. The authentic sweet is really delicious, Haci Bekir's sweets are renownd as they do not burn the throat, they are smooth and should not dry or irritate the throat, it should be an unforgetable experience. Believe me, one try of this stuff and you'll never eat the replica's ever, ever again. This is why I put these images in. The image on the page is not "Turkish Delight" it is Majun, there are many types of Majun, a famous type being "Mesir Majunu", these are easy mistakes to make however, there is a huge differenct between these sweets. Also the recipe is a secret kept by the family who still makes this speciality in Istanbul. johnstevens5 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.49.247 (discuss • contribs)
 * Right. and this article is not about that particular company, it is about what most people eat under the name TD. Since everyone in the world is not making to journey to Istanbul to buy that one type of TD, nor will they ever, we need to keep the article more general. Thanks for your efforts. psch  e  mp  |  talk  23:08, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I uploaded what I think is a better image to commons.wikipedia.org (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Turkish_Delight.jpg) but this page uses the ugly image with the same name on en.wikipedia.org by default when I try to include it. Anyone know a way around this other than changing its name at commons? 70.71.155.24 00:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

A Last Note
The next Greek who emails me a letter with CAPSLOCK ON about "Greek Delight" will get a 100% free,natural prostate examination by the tip of my boot.--85.97.76.234 16:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Romanian
Well i don't see you using the talk page either. At any rate, why is the slang term relevent if there is no explanation of the connection? As you have it, its just a random fact, a coincidence that they are the same term. Unless you can put a cited reason for the relevence, it shouldn't be there. psch e  mp  |  talk  20:45, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm, didn't an earlier version of this article suggest that it was indicative of the popularity of Turkish Delight that it survived despite that unappetizing name? --Iustinus 04:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
 * intesting, theory, but no, not earlier version said that. psch  e  mp  |  talk  14:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm not finding it either, but I could have sworn. I wonder where I got that idea then.
 * BTW, was it you who added that bit in the first place? --Iustinus 17:43, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes as that's what all the Romanians I know tell me, but as it isn't sourced or cited, it really should have never been inserted. psch  e  mp  |  talk  18:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Mastic
I was under the impression that Mastic was used in Turkish Delight (backed up by the fact that the Mastic article even mentions its use in Turkish Delight). However, this article does not mention its use… Shouldn't we include it? –Wulf 05:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I second this, not from any knowledge - got here from the mastic article - but if anyone knows more please add reference if appropriate. Thanks -Fitzhugh 10:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Mastic is used just as a flavour in Turkish Delight. (It's not a special ingredient or something). A plain Turkish delight is without mastic, pistachos, rose, (or rose water) or nuts. (There would be few drops of lemon juice in it only.)

 * Turkish Delight with Mastic is called as "Sakızlı Lokum" in Turkish.

Method order
Between revisions 743093 and 743095, the recipe order was changed from

bring sugar/water to boil ->  add cornstarch  ->  boil to "firm ball" stage

to

bring sugar/water to boil ->  boil to "firm ball" stage  ->  add cornstarch

(http://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=Cookbook:Turkish_Delight&diff=next&oldid=743095)

No explanation was given as to why this change was made, would someone with more knowledge of the recipe than me please elaborate? (I have successfully used earlier revision of this recipe, although I can see that the cooking process would be significantly simpler without having to boil a pot of high viscosity cornstarch-thickened sugar).

Qupada (talk) 06:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Has anyone succeeded?
I tried several times, using a digital thermocouple thermometer, and volume-annotated cups and spoons. Each time I got something runny. If someone put a picture of lokums made with recipe, then I will be convinced. --ValentinDavid (talk) 17:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

title: Cookbook talk:Turkish Delight


text:
Cookbook:Tattie Scones

Tattie scones, also called potato scones or potato bread, are a regional variant of the savoury "griddle scone" which is especially popular in Scotland. Many variations of recipe exist, however they generally include liberal quantities of boiled Tatties (potatoes) and salt.

Potato scones are traditionally quarter circular fan shaped, and generally about 90 mm in radius. Because of this, potato scones are often bought in multiples of four. They are distinct from other scones in being made deliberately thin (usually 7 mm or so) – they are, in many ways, more like a soft oatcake than a true scone. Nowadays, they're usually served as part of a cooked breakfast with fried eggs, bacon, etc. They are also considered by many Scots to be a perfect accompaniment to Irn-Bru as a hangover cure.

A fairly easy recipe for potato scones is as follows:

Ingredients

 * 1 kg floury potatoes (e.g. Yukon gold)
 * Butter
 * Salt and pepper
 * Flour

Procedure

 * 1) Cook potatoes in salted boiling water until tender, drain them well and put them back into the hot pot to dry them out a bit.
 * 2) Mash them well with lots of butter and salt and pepper, but no milk or other liquid. Let them cool.
 * 3) When the potatoes are cold, stir in flour and a little more melted butter to make a smooth dough. Roll out to a thickness of about 5 mm, and cut into 3-inch (7.5 cm) wedges.
 * 4) Cook in a lightly-buttered frying pan until golden, about 1–2 minutes a side.
 * 5) Serve the potato scones right away with cold butter to spread on top, or store them in the fridge until you want to use them, reheating them in a well-buttered frying pan.
 * 6) Some people are content to eat them cold with butter, or heat them in a toaster for buttering. They also freeze very, very well.

title: Cookbook:Tattie Scones


text:
Cookbook:Snickerdoodles IV

| Cookies

Snickerdoodles are sugar cookies lightly dusted with cinnamon. They have a characteristically crackly surface, and can be crisp or soft, depending on preference. Some variants include nutmeg, raisins, or nuts. They are a traditional Christmas cookie in North America.

The Joy of Cooking claims that snickerdoodles are probably German in origin, and that the name is a corruption of the German word for "snail noodles" (schneckennudeln).

Ingredients

 * 344 g (2 ¾ cups or 24 oz) all-purpose flour
 * ¼ tsp salt
 * 1 tsp baking soda
 * 2 tsp cream of tartar
 * 300 g (1½ cups or 9 oz) superfine sugar
 * 110 g (½ cup or 4 oz) butter
 * 100 g (½ cup or 4 oz) shortening
 * 2 eggs
 * 1 tsp vanilla extract
 * 3 tbsp sugar
 * 1½ tsp cinnamon

Procedure

 * 1) Preheat oven to 350°F.
 * 2) Mix flour, salt, baking soda, cream of tartar. Set aside.
 * 3) Beat butter, shortening and sugar.
 * 4) Beat in eggs and vanilla.
 * 5) Gradually add dry ingredients, mixing fully.
 * 6) Roll into 1 tbsp balls.
 * 7) Mix sugar and cinnamon.
 * 8) Roll balls in sugar-cinnamon mixture.
 * 9) Refrigerate for 30 minutes.
 * 10) Bake for 10 minutes or until crisp and light brown.
 * 11) Let cool completely before eating.

Alternate recipes

 * Cookbook:Snickerdoodles (Boston Globe)
 * Cookbook:Snickerdoodles (Idaho Daily Statesman)
 * Cookbook:Snickerdoodles (Alternate 1)
 * Cookbook:Snickerdoodles (Alternate 2)
 * Cookbook:Snickerdoodles (Alternate 3)

title: Cookbook:Snickerdoodles IV