Talk:California roll

message: This line "The earliest mention in print of a 'California roll' was in the Los Angeles Times and an Ocala, Florida newspaper on November 25, 1979.[9]" refers to reference 9 which is a book published in 2012. It is entirely wrong as support for a 1979 claim.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.184.76 (talk) 14:01, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: bad link

message: I know that the bollsrolls are popular across the United States and in Asia outside of Japan (especially in South Korea) but is there any reference for how popular it is within Japan?
:I think that is a next step for this article: to explain its role, popularity (or lack of) in Japan.  I actually got the impression (from reading newspaper articles while researching the California roll) that it is one of the few American-type rolls that are made by very traditional chefs; that's certainly been my experience in restaurants in the U.S.  I will try and find more reliable info.  --C S (Talk) 14:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: California roll in Japan

message: Whatever the original source article was, they got his name wrong.
http://www.chowhound.com/topics/show/53630?user_name=&query=mashita
One of the comments on the post is from his son.
:Great.  One of the comments also had a link to  which has his correct name and also some further info on the original California roll.  It would be great if somebody went and looked through the Rafu Shimpo newspaper archives for articles on Mashita.  --C S (Talk) 10:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: It's "Mashita" not "Manashita"

message: I removed the following from the article:
*In the Philippines, the avocado is replaced with mango and the outer layer of rice is almost always sprinkled with tobiko; it is known as the California Roll. However, such rolls with cucumber instead of mango also exist, commonly known as the Santa Monica Roll.
The popularity of sushi in North American has resulted in an explosion of off-shoots. Numerous inside-out rolls are being invented and popularized. Regional variations feature ingredients common to or representative of the area they are named after. 
*The B.C. roll features B.C. salmon.
*the Philadelphia roll uses cream cheese as an ingredient.
*The dynamite roll includes prawn tempura.
*The rainbow roll features a layer of various sashimi outside of the rice.
*Other rolls include scallops, spicy tuna, cucumber, avocado, beef or chicken teriyaki, shrimp, cheese (in France), and okra and are usually named after their ingredients.
*Some rolls are now made with brown rice or even black rice.
This isn't really about the California roll anymore; these aren't "variations" but actually different rolls.  It might be worth mentioning its influence on the creation of other rolls.  In that case, some of this info should be useful, which is why I've moved it here.   --C S (Talk) 10:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regional variations 

message: I basically reverted most of these recent edits.  The most obvious is the part about the California roll not being popular in Japan because avocado is not a usual japanese ingredient.  This is just sheer speculation and the given source is completely irrelevant.  It's probably wrong too.  Sure, avocado is not a classic Japanese ingredient.  But the most obvious reason it isn't popular in japan is that well, it's not a Japanese dish.  Why would it be popular in Japan?  Japanese people don't typically adopt foreign cuisine that is Japan-inspired.  
In addition, personal opinions like "remain to be distinctly an American product" are unnecessary and detract from the encyclopedic tone of the article.  Please leave such commentaries out of the article.  I left in the part about Callifornia roll not being mentioned in Japanese cookbooks, even though I think it assumes the reader is stupid enough to think non-Japanese dishes should be mentioned in Japanese cookbooks. --C S (talk) 01:16, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: you should try it  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.232.21.47 (talk) 05:07, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  recent edits 

message: Notice the first line, "The California roll is a maki-zushi (roll), and is not a kind of sushi roll". maki-zushi is a form of sushi, so it can't be maki-zushi AND not sushi at the same time, can it?  I actually think that MAYBE this is a form of subtle vandalism, as people don't usually define something by what it is NOT. Like if I made an article about penicillin and wrote "penicillin is not an opiate".
The other theory is that the person who added that assumes because it's not made with fish (although actually fake crab is made from fish, most people don't realize that however) it's not sushi, but that's not true, sushi doesn't HAVE to have fish in it. I think the article even mentions that.
So I'm going to take out the because I think it's obvious california roll is a kind of sushi. Oh, and I also merged a couple sentences to avoid starting with "but" (yes I know that you CAN start a sentence with it, but people argue over it and it's generally considered "more correct" not to, and this way it's one less thing for people to argue over) and improve the flow of the article. Whoever added that sentence also added two spaces after the period for some reason. 
-Indalcecio (talk) 03:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's NOT sushi? What? 

message: I remember a term "california stop" for getting to a stop sign, and not coming all the way down to zero mph, back in the 60's.
Calling that a "california roll" was probably a later quip by a policeman who had just been to a Japanese restaurant for lunch. 162.205.217.211 (talk) 03:59, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  California Stop 

message: I revoked Mariani (2014) Encyclopedia as source and replaced it with Smith (2012).
This is because Mariani staed that an Ocala, Florida newspaper was the first to print "California roll". But actually according to Smith the LA Times Calendar section printed it on the same date, so Mariani's info was rather incomplete. --Kiyoweap (talk) 06:08, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: First mention in print

message: Andrew F. Smith (2012), p. 91 states:</br>
"A much more likely claimant to the title of California Roll inventor is Ken Seusa".
This runs counter to the paragraph lead that most food historians regar chef Mashita as inventor.</br>
But I'm just going to tamper much with that for now.
Smith's point is Seusa is documented as inventor of "California roll".</br>
But the obvious counterargument is Mashita was the first inventor of " maki sushi with crab and avocado". --Kiyoweap (talk) 06:01, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ken Seusa as inventor 

message: The article didn't seem to mention the nori seaweed before I added it in, but is this something you should assume the reader understands?
The lead says the roll is usually made "inside-out" but just looking at the image, I really doubt the uninitiated reader can deduce that the thin film of nori is rolled up in the inner surface.
I suppose the alternative is to develop uramaki (the Japanese term for the "inside-out") into a short article or a section of its own, instead of the current redirect to Sushi#Makizushi.--Kiyoweap (talk) 05:43, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Nori or wrapper

message: The citation to claim the   most widely accepted view by food historians attributes the invention to Ichiro Mashita is invalid and I am therfore editing the article to compensate for this inaccuracy.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.102.46.83 (talk) 10:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: most widely accepted view