Talk:Sushi

message: Does anyone know the origins of the California Roll? I know that its a Westernization of traditional sushi but was it actually invented in California?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.180.240.187 (talk) 00:16, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably... read the California roll article. 107.77.202.209 (talk) 22:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  California Roll 

message: I think that the "Regional Styles" section from over at List_of_sushi_and_sashimi_ingredients belongs here, since that is simply a list of ingredients. Challenger l (talk) 15:46, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regional Styles, from list of ingredients 

message: In this edit, User:35.134.146.62 reverted my short description "Japanese dish of rice and usually fish" (38 chars) to the longer "Portioned prepared vinegared rice topped or rolled with other ingredients" (73 chars), with the Edit summary "The short description is too narrow, calls it a dish, and makes fish too prominent."
Short descriptions are supposed to be limited to roughly 40 characters; the long version here is far too long.
Also, the long description is a definition, which is not the purpose of an SD (WP:HOWTOSD). It also doesn't mention by far the most common form of sushi known to most non-Japanese. I don't see that "usually fish" makes "fish too prominent". Yes, of course there are many forms of sushi that don't contain fish, which I think is reasonably covered by "usually".
It also seems essential to say that it is a dish in Japanese cuisine, which is after all what the lead of the article already calls it. I don't know why .62 objects to the term "dish".
I suppose a more technically accurate SD that fits the 40-character limit would be "Japanese dish of vinegared rice" (31 chars), but I'm not sure that conveys the sense to most of our readers. For that matter, "Japanese dish" would technically be a correct SD, but doesn't communicate as effectively. --Macrakis (talk) 21:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: As there has been no objection, I have put the fish back in the short description. GA-RT-22 (talk) 19:47, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the word "traditional", which adds nothing, and also "usually", which is just pedantic. As I said above, a short description is not intended to be a complete definition. --Macrakis (talk) 13:45, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Short description

message: I changed the image of oshi-zushi. 
The previous image is not oshi-zushi. It is the image of california rolls that imitated the style of oshi-zushi.
But unfortunately someone reverted my edit.
So I changed the image again.
--Vh523x4 (talk) 08:42, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Oshizushi

message: Hi, I checked the source for this sentence "For these reasons, EU regulations forbid the use of fresh raw fish. It must be frozen at temperatures below −20 °C (−4 °F) in all parts of the product for no less than 24 hours.'" and have to report a potential factual error. The relevant segment of said EU regulation details specifically the treatment of Bivalve Molluscs and not all raw fish. This source appears to be a set of expansions on a pre-existing set of hygiene regulations that may cover raw fish but did not detail the specifics regarding bivalve molluscs and a few other specific areas and needed expansion via this document. Either we need to change the source for this phrase or we need to remove the phrase if no source can be found. 2A02:A03F:8A3F:AB00:A81E:74FD:AF6F:A529 (talk) 11:18, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we have a source link for your statement? Thank you!  JthomasP (talk) 03:16, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

text: I'm of the opinion that an assertion without evidence may be equally dismissed without evidence. Challenger l (talk) 16:46, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  HEALTH RISKS - regarding the paragraph on EU regulations