Talk:Tea egg

message: It would probably help if this article actually started off by saying what these things are, rather than delving immediately into specifics. G-Flex (talk) 05:48, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better introduction to concept 

message: Please see WP:NOTRECIPE since this article reads like a recipe or cookbook entry.  That is not the purpose of an encyclopedia.  We are to merely describe what a Tea egg is, where it is eaten, it's history and if necessary, we can quote primary sources that describe the preparation but to write it out as if the article author(s) are giving the instructions violated the manual of style.  Please help me with this if you can and help me add proper inline citation.  it's a fascinating food subject!  I'd hate to see it deleted for improper format. LiPollis (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia articles should not be written like cookbook entries - can other interested editors help edit this subject  to make article more encyclopedic?

message: Just to give a definition: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/precooked 06:39, 24 August 2013‎ Yaksar (talk | contribs)
:One could say: "...a boiled egg is cracked and then boiled again ..."
:Incorrect is: "...a pre-boiled egg is cracked and then boiled again ..." because the word "again" makes the "pre" in redundant.
:We can get rid of the "pre" or the "again". Getting rid of the "pre" sounds better. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:23, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: My worry is that, even though the pre seems redundant, it actually does have a specialized meaning. Pre-cooking in general is a concept referring to cooking before a food's ultimate cooking. While boiling and then boiling again would technically still cover the process, it's less descriptive. It's similar to a "pre-cooked" meal that one may put in a microwave. Even if it would still techically describe it correctly, you would use pre-cooked rather than cooked.--Yaksar (let's chat) 14:23, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. What if we use "...prepared by boiling..." or something? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:39, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not completely clear what you mean here -- do you want it to say "in which an egg is prepared by boiling and then boiling"? Because that seems to face the same issue. My main issue with this is that yes, the original editor may have had a point when he said in his edit summary that "The correct word is boiled. "Pre" is a nonsense prefix that is becoming uselessly used everywhere." but, as dumb as it may sound, the word serves it's own distinct purpose even if it's not technically correct if only looked at as the sum of its parts. When doing laundry, for example, "pre-washing" is technically just washing, but no one would argue that a pre-wash isn't a distinct and defined concept. --Yaksar (let's chat) 14:48, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, the "prepared" suggestion was just an attempt to find compromise. "pre-washing" is fine if the word "again" doesn't come later. That's the issue. But really, this isn't worth a long discussion. I'd won't kick up a fuss either way. If you want to get rough consensus by asking what others think, I'd guess 9/10 would agree with my first statement in this thread. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:53, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pre-boiling 

message: Are the Malaysian and Indonesioan variations homonymous? I see the same name attributed to both: telur pindang. Gikü (talk) 21:39, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Nvmd, should've read the article on telur pindang itself. Gikü (talk) 13:10, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Telur pindang'' 

message: :There are so many things wrong about saying that majority of Chinese can't afford to eat tea eggs? Then what do they eat if they can't buy the cheapest food items? There are many homeless people in America too, yet if we similarly cherrypick that real fact and then use it to prove that many Americans can't afford milk. That's just inaccurate and grossly misleading. 
Secondly the source, when translated to English, did not even say anything about Shenzhen. Or that the MAJORITY of Chinese can't afford to pay for tea eggs despite they cost like 30 cents in cities. They are so cheap and a common dish among villagers. To put it in perspective - More than 90% of millennials in China own smartphones and 90% of families in the country own their home, giving China one of the highest homeownership rates in the world yet they can't afford 2 yuans for eggs?? https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/03/30/how-people-in-china-afford-their-outrageously-expensive-homes/#3023b227a3ce https://www.business.hsbc.com/navigator/made-for-china/six-things-you-may-not-know-about-chinese-millennials How outdated are people's views? It's not like china back in the 90s - a lot changed after 30 years. 
Also the source to back it was Apple Daily which is a bold nativist paper that is not shy in being dirty against mainlanders. Ans allowing ads to call them locusts and never apologizing for it. https://blogs.wsj.com/scene/2012/02/01/locust-ad-breaks-in-apple-daily And despite that, the article in apple daily explicitly cherry-picks the poorest people (70.17 million rural poor people) instead of also describing the majority of China (1. billion people)_. This is basically a spun article trying to verify a Taiwanese professor's ignorant comment without explaining that tea eggs cost a few cents in cities and many Chinese do frequently eat out. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3022190/taiwanese-financial-expert-mocked-saying-many-mainland-chinese 
Granted that comment was back in 2011 - China's middle class has grown enormously since then so it would be even less true today. Unless Shenzhen today has majority beggars and people living in rags - that comment is ignorant https://www.businessinsider.com/chinas-middle-class-is-exploding-2016-8?IR=T 49.195.134.75 (talk) 15:29, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ignorant comment about tea eggs that is out of touch