Talk:Hong Kong-style Western cuisine

message: Shouldn't "Western" be capitalized? --Dpr 04:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization 

message: This article has been edited back and forth, around the term sai chaan . User:Alanmak thinks that there is no such term in English, and hence should be removed, whereas I find no problem to use a non-English term if italicised. So far there is no valid and reasonable argument justifying why a literal translation is so superior to a transliteration, that the transliterated variant cannot even be included and must be removed from the article. — Instantnood 17:58, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it should be italicised, but with the (transliterated version) in brackets, Werdna648T/C\@ 09:38, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. Would you agree with the earlier version ? — Instantnood 14:37, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Thank you. Glad to hear you enjoyed it.   Would you agree with the earlier version  of the article? — Instantnood 12:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

text: But then Hong Kong-style western cuisine is merely a description. It's not the name that anybody would call it . I've no comment towards what should be the title of the article, but I don't think it's appropriate to prefer Hong Kong-style western cuisine to a transliterated name for use within the article. — Instantnood 08:44, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem here, is descriptive titles arent always appriopriate for particular nouns, such as in this case, where people automatically assume it is the proper English name of the said dish. Hence my question of why this is called "cuisine" as thou it is the only known English reference to it, when chaan dosent neccesarily = cuisine. (unfortunately, some folks seem to think I am debating on the very existance of these dishes instead)--Huaiwei 19:26, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

text: And the same applies to "Hong Kong-style Western cuisine", which is a wikipedian self-construction.--Huaiwei 00:17, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Explain, then, the large number of instances in which the above phrase appears in non capital letters, suggesting this is hardly a proper noun. I would like to know how it came to be decided on capitalising this article as thou it is an accepted terminology in widespread usage? Both versions turns up a puny number of entries. Surely this means an alternative should be found, or is this dish devoid of an English name (or its existance as a "dictinct cuisine"?)--Huaiwei 07:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Sai chaan''

message: I removed the reference that Hong Kong style Western cuisine is served in Cha Chaan Tengs, because it just...  isn't.  Even if you look at the Cha Chaan Teng wiki entry, the food listed there is not the same as the description of the dishes in this entry.  Hong Qi Gong 18:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Many cha chaan tengs do serve sai chaan. — Instantnood 19:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, some dishes they serve are derived from western dishes.  But the easiest qualifier is this:  do people go to a cha chan tang for sai chaan?  The answer is no.  To me, the defining thing about sai chaan or "Hong Kong-style Western cuisine" is the soup they serve and the fact that the main course is always on a plate and always eatened with a fork and knife.  Most of the food you eat at a cha chan tang, you eat with chopsticks.  Hong Qi Gong 20:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Cha chaan teng actually refers to a pretty broad variety of restaurants, food served at these restaurants differ greatly. Some restaurants do exhibit many specific elements of cha chaan tengs, yet are mainly serving sai chaan. — Instantnood 15:33, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if we're qualifying "Hong Kong-style Western cuisine" as sai chaan, then I insist that we don't reference cha chaan tang.  Simply because nobody goes to a cha chaan tang to have sai chaan.  They go to a sai chaan restaurant to have sai chaan, to eat their "red or white" soup, and to have a steak with fork and knives.  Hong Qi Gong 15:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: And many of these sai chaan restaurants are in many ways qualified as cha chaan tengs. And sai chaan are served, tho not exclusively, at a lot of cha chaan tengs. — Instantnood 16:59, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, we must be going to different cha chaan tangs then, because the ones I've been to are nothing like the restaurants that people go to for sai chaan.  :-P   Hong Qi Gong 17:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: -P — Instantnood 17:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cha Chaan Teng 

message: Removed zhuyin for the same reason given at Talk:District_Council_of_Hong_Kong#Romanizations. It is neither the original Chinese script nor a romanization system And according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (China-related articles), it is not necessary to repeat Chinese characters twice where they do not differ.--Jiang 05:25, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romanizations 

message: Are there actually any sources that claim that Hong Kong style Western cuisine catered to the taste of Chinese North Americans?  If not, I'm going to delete that reference from the article.  Why was it there in the first place?  Hong Qi Gong 05:23, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cater to Chinese North Americans? 

message: We need more sources for this article!  Especially ones about the history of the subject matter.  We might have to search for Chinese-language sources.  Right now we only have one very short article and I don't think it's very informative.  I doubt its accuracy, also.  Hong Qi Gong 05:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need more sources!