# Talk:Gibanica

Gibati means to move on Serbian. Just a proposition for change.
--46.5.2.160 (talk) 19:18, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

As for Wikipedia guidelines, there is no need to find citations for common knowledge. 
Refer to this page from a Slovenian restaurant, where Gibanica is also listed as Serbian. No one is trying to belittle your Prekmurska gibanica in this page for mentioning Gibanica Serbian origins. At the end of the day, even if these are related, Prekmurska gibanica is still different. Therefore, I would appreciate if you stop questioning everything, Duja. Asterion 21:29, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I question the commonality of the knowledge. Why is the page from a Slovenian restaurant relevant for anything? And why do you assume my origins?
Now, Gibanica is indeed one of symbols of Serbian cuisine. It is very often related with Serbia indeed. It doesn't prove that it actually originates in Serbia. Cf. Kajmak. But Banitsa is basically the same thing, and an obvious cognate? Why you insist on inserting so strong statements? Who did perform the research on the origin? Sorry, I can't accept blank statements like that. Duja 21:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I realised you removed the Serbian Cyrillic name of the related dishes in the Prekmurska gibanica article, so I assumed you took offence somehow. Apologies for any misunderstanding. I agree up to a certain point with your reasoning (in the same way that it would be silly to claim that Šljivovica is a drink from a single country). I would suggest a NPOV rephrasing as "Gibanica is a traditional Serbian dish" and then list any related dishes further down. Your thoughts? Asterion 22:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
I apologize if I was harsh in my reply... I got a bit annoyed on other things. Yes, that was my intention too, to make the statement about the origin in a less direct and more NPOV manner; I doubt there is a real research about the origin (and it doesn't matter much anyway). Thanks. Duja 22:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Btw, since you mentioned Prekmurska gibanica, just now I realized that it was the thing that got me annoyed :-D (just I forgot about it in the meantime)... it seems that some guys would even write English in Cyrillic. In capitals, preferrably. Duja 22:30, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
No problem, mate. I know what wikistress is. I've been there myself ;-) Cheers, Asterion 22:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

This is a type of Gibanica made by Cetniks during WW2. It`s made almoast like the standard serbian one, but is made in a deep pot instead of the usual think baking one. Note: contains lot more cheese. Can anybody put that into the artical as well? I see that it`s wrongly described on this web page, but i couldn`t find any other reference 
http://www.freewebs.com/serbijen/kuhinja.htm  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.149.16 (talk) 19:12, 30 January 2010 (UTC) 

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gibanica/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sven Manguard (talk · contribs) 05:00, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I apologize, but I am going to have to fail this nomination. At this time, there is simply too much content that needs to be added at this time. Feel free to resubmit once you feel that the issues below have been addressed. 
So what I recommend is that before you go any further, you take a look at the articles Falafel, Fluffernutter, Frog cake, Stargazy pie, and Hyderabadi haleem. These are all articles on prepared foods and are all GA level.
There are several sections that this article does not have that it either must or should have. I believe that it must have a true history section, like the one in Fluffernutter or Frog cake. I also believe that the section currently titled "Origins" needs to be retitled "Etymology", and then expanded. It doesn't have to be as large as the one in Falafel, but it's too small now. I applaud the inclusion of a section on variants, however the description of how the dish is made is far too sparse, and needs expanding. Finally, I think that it needs a cultural impact section, as is seen in Fluffernutter, Stargazy pie, and Hyderabadi haleem.
As for things that I think would definitely benefit the article, but are not exactly 'must haves', I would consider adding a nutrition section. Both Falafel and Hyderabadi haleem have one, with the section in Falafel being the better of the two.
In addition, there are several content changes that need mentioning:
- "gibanica" should remain in italics in the Origins/Etymology section, but should not be italicized in the lead or the  other sections. 
- The "Old Serbian proverb" doesn't belong where it is. It might be worth mentioning in a cultural impact section, but outside of such a section it is not appropriate for inclusion.
- Once you have a larger article to work with, File:PrekmurskaGibanica1.JPG and/or File:Međimurska gibanica (Croatia).jpg should be added in. I actually thing that the first of the two of those images is (assuming that it is a normal example of this dish) a better image of the dish.
Thank you for putting all of this work into the article. I hope that you take my recommendations in consideration, and are able to bring this back to GAN one day. Sven Manguard Wha? 05:42, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for review. I will do my best to make this article again GAN according to your instructions. Greetings and best wishes. (Nightwolf87 (talk) 09:34, 22 March 2013 (UTC))

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gibanica/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Dwaipayanc (talk · contribs) 02:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
At its present form, the article is unlikely to pass GA.

The lead is not up to the mark, it fails to adequately summarize the article.
Why is L capitalized in Large vocabulary? Is it a specific publication?
There are also derivatives like Gibanicar... In which language?
the game named gibankanje: how is that related to the topic of this article?
the opening sentence of the second paragraph of Preparation ( Gibanica is a round shaped...) is problematic. The two ands in the sentence is not properly structured, perhaps some word or punctuation is missing.
the first sentence in History," ... It was first mentioned ... From the 17th century. " First mentioned from? Shouldn't it be first mentioned in?
and the first mention of the word was as a last name or nickname? How come it became a food? Is the last name still prevalent?
.. Because of this was applied for the Guineas... Wrong grammar.
In many instances, the prose quality, although not wrong, is not of good quality.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
A few of the issues have been addressed, but others remain. It would be greatly helpful for review purpose if nominator or other involved editors comment in this review page, updating us about the progress. Otherwise we might have to close this as a failure.--Dwaipayan (talk) 03:48, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
I noticed this article was up for GAN, so I decided to copy-edit some of it. Tell me what you think. 23 editor (talk) 20:07, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi! You have addressed most of the issues, however, the lead needs to be more comprehensive.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:39, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
I've fixed the lead, and done some further copy-editing. 23 editor (talk) 00:36, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Great work. In my opinion, this article meets GA criteria.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:18, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

The reason why I searched for this article is information about true gibanica origin. It is quite possible that gibanica is Serbian and that's what I actually  wanted to know..."is gibanica a Serbian dish or did its origin got lost in time?" But I see that the only sources listed are Serbian and I am interested if any reliable, neutral sources about gibanica origin exist. "Gibati" is a Serbo-Croatian word (i.e. common Croatian word), so that's hardly an argument for "Serbian origin". This wouldn't be first time that Balkanian (Serbian) nationalists claim that everything that ever originated in South-Eastern Europe is originally made by "their" nation, so I am a bit sceptical about it.
I also have the problem with "gibanica" redirecting to Serbian variety. This is especially problematic because this is the only "gibanica" article that claims that gibanica is Serbian, using only Serbian sources to back this claim. I do not question the origin of this particular variety of gibanica, but I think that the true origin of "original" gibanica is not known. Serbs were not the only Slavic nation in the balkans once, despite the claims of certain ultra-nationalists.
Perhaps this article should be renamed to Gibanica (Serbian) or something like that?
But, if nothing else "Međimurska" and "Prekmurska" should be mentioned on top of the article, if the casual visitor is already redirected.
The one and only Croatian source listed here argues that is is not known if gibanica is Croatian or Slovenian, Serbia is not even mentioned. While it doesn't really contradict this article, it also doesn't support it.
Also, the claim about gibanica being available worldwide is an extraordinary claim and extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence and so I decided to check it, despite being unrelated to origins of gibanica.  This Serbian source talks about one Serbian restaurant "Kafana" in New York that is owned by some Serbian patriot. Like most restaurants owners, he bragged about his restaurant.
Is this really a reliable source for this claim? "Gibanica can be found worldwide"..? In New York, perhaps...the world...not so much. So, this claim either needs more sources (about more than one restaurant) or should be changed to something more accurate, like "available in New York". But I guess it doesn't sound so impressive, so the Serbian editors might disagree :D
Disclaimer: I love Serbian gibanica and I visits my relatives in Serbia every few years, so don't try to paint me as some Serbophobic, neo-nazi nationalist. My questions about the origin of gibanica are real and not sarcastic. And this isn't the only article about balkan food that needs some serious editing, plenty of them are much worse than this one.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.1.239.208 (talk) 13:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC) 

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Gibanica/CommentsTalk:Gibanica/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Last edited at 02:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC).
Substituted at 16:14, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Gibanica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.medjimurski-dvori.hr/med_gibanica.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304110950/http://keepitfit.net/food/85/gibanica to http://keepitfit.net/food/85/gibanica
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:29, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

I wanted to add a wikilink to this page, but found that it is blocked from editing. Please correct this ridiculous situation! 173.88.246.138 (talk) 21:48, 7 July 2022 (UTC)