Talk:Dolma

message: In Cyprus this food is called Koupepin, Κουπέπιν, which comes from Arabic kubeba and NOT Dolma or Ντολμάς. Could this be an arabic dish?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by WhiteMagick (talk • contribs) 20:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cyprus 

message: I dont know how to use arabic text, so will someone do me the favor of adding waraq dawali as the arabic name of the food, and state that it is popular in Levantine Arab countries.  Thank you   -Niz
: I can also attest to this name being used in the Palestinian territories as well as within the Arab community in Israel.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.123.4.230 (talk) 20:02, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In Greece, at least, with-meat and without-meat versions of dolma are both common, with preference depending largely on the time of year (vegetarian is more common in the summertime; meat in the wintertime). --Delirium 21:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: The greek says "dolmadakia", but a transliteration of the greek text says "dolmadhes" ("ntolmades").  Could someone "in the know" please correct it?  As yet there isn't even a gareek article for reference... Tomertalk 23:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They're both correct; the "-akia" version is a diminutive plural ending, while the "-adhes" version is a "normal" plural ending.  They have slightly different connotations, but are mostly interchangeable. --Delirium 21:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Greek?

message: ntolmades are lachanontolmades (made with cabbage)while ntolmadakia(small ntolmades) usually refers to the ones made with vine leaves. They are not interchangable.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.130.88.134 (talk) 11:02, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: no they are not

message: Which variety of grape plant is used for the leaves, typically? Concord, chardonnay, pinot, etc? Badagnani (talk) 10:26, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever grapes you have.  In Europe, they will of course be Vitis vinifera. I would guess Concord grape leaves would work, but I don't know. --Macrakis (talk) 13:12, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: that's what i use.. white/green grapes, though.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.191.11.163 (talk) 22:51, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which variety of grape? 

message: Hey, what about the translation, dawali - that's the one I'm familiar with, both don;t see it represented here. LamaLoLeshLa (talk) 08:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What is the language? Badagnani (talk) 17:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Palestinians call it dawali. --Falastine fee Qalby (talk) 19:45, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  dawali 

message: I could see that it is missing it  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevecam (talk • contribs) 00:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nutritional information 

message: In most cases people don't make a distinction between the two. Dolma can be (and is often) used for both Dolma and Sarma dishes, but Sarma is sometimes used to dishes that are "wrapped" (i.e. leaf/cabbage dishes). Sarma(Food) need only be a section the Dolma article, not an entire one on its own. Both Dolma and Sarma dishes usually share the same filling and similar preparations etc, and are derived fromt he same concept.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alperyasar (talk • contribs) 03:05, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't agree either, but seems like you don't care much about others' opinions. --E4024 (talk) 22:48, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to Merge "Sarma (Food)" article with this one. 

message: I'm changing the spelling of
: I had no idea what the Greek word in the title of the unsigned above comment meant; so I checked it by Google Translator for curiosity. The result in English is "stuffed vine leaves" and in Turkish "Yaprak Sarma". Sharing it with other curious people like me... :-) --E4024 (talk) 10:30, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin-alphabet spelling of kουπέπια 

message: If we shove in a category for every nation that has this, things will get unwieldy. Can people suggest some cath all s (suh as Balkan cuisine) that will cover everywhere relevant?--Peter cohen (talk) 10:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories beginning to get unwieldy 

message: "Meat dolma are generally served warm, often with sauce" - which sauce(s) would that be? 77.8.103.5 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 03:12, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sauces 

message: Tomato leaves are poisonous 98.118.62.140 (talk) 22:00, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. It looks like soemone copied to the previous entry and forgot to remove the mention of leaf. Thanks for pointing this out. If in the future you see something similar, you're welcome to fix it yourself--Peter cohen (talk) 22:55, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tomato leaf dolma ? 

message: I oppose on this suggestion. Gemista is a unique & remarkable Hellenic food in Greece and of course, must have its own article.--46.177.179.219 (talk) 21:45, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Rubbish.  "Gemista" simply means "stuffed". Reliable sources like the Oxford Companion to Food make this clear. --Macrakis (talk) 03:11, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Gemista]] - merged into Dolma 

message: What we need is not merger but a good article on Dolma and another good article on "Sarma", as dishes of the Turkish cuisine. Thirty something new countries have emerged from the lands of the Ottoman Empire and they are all asking for the Turkish cultural heritage to be recorded as theirs because they added their own "plural" to the Turkish word (Dolma-Dolmades) or their language likes strong sounds (Dolma-Tolma) better... This is just a Turkish cuisine item. The reason why Dolma and Sarma are so mixed up is also -at least in great part- due to this use of Turkish words in foreign languages. Check up with Japanese or Chinese kitchens and you will see how an authentic Japanese or Chinese dish name has taken different shapes in the countries of their own cultural sphere of influence. (Look more closely into the Japanese culinary influence in Peru or Brasil, for example. What do you see?) --E4024 (talk) 10:01, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the merger is proposed because many cultures use dolma to mean sarma, as sarma and dolma are the same food category. Western Armenians and Greeks make the distinction, but Eastern Armenians don't. And btw, It may be possible that sarma was a term used mostly in certain locations maybe by Armenians and Greeks in the Ottoman empire, which is why Turks use the term yaprak in addition to sarma. I don't know how it is today, it would be a good research project to find out why Turks used yaprak when a term like sarma existed. Also why are you so intent to make dolma Turkish? Just because Turks eat it, it does not mean it is Turkish origin. There is no evidence, and in fact there is evidence to suggest it is Armenian origin, but for now I refrained from mentioning this directly, because I know I will get into an edit war. Thinkfood (talk) 02:35, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  No merger 

message: Nowhere in Turkey Yaprak Sarma (filled vine leaves) is called "Yaprak". So I erased it from the text. --E4024 (talk) 09:35, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yaprak Sarma 

message: I've removed this as it is just used for culture wars over the origin of the Dolma. I doubt very much that we can find an origin for stuffed wrapped in leaves - which very likely goes back to prehistoric times. Please don't replace it without reliable sources - in this case it would have to be academic sources, not popular ones. Dougweller (talk) 08:43, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: The link is not to Ottoman Empire, but to Ottoman cuisine. This article states that "the Ottoman cuisine has strongly influenced other cuisines such as Persian cuisine, Armenian cuisine, Cypriot cuisine, that of the Balkans (Greek cuisine, Bulgarian cuisine, Romanian cuisine, Macedonian cuisine, Albanian cuisine, Serbian cuisine, Bosnian cuisine), and that of the Middle East (Levantine cuisine, Lebanese cuisine, Syrian cuisine, Iraqi cuisine, Jordanian cuisine, Palestinian cuisine, and Israeli cuisine)." Thus it calls Greek cuisine an "other cuisine". Ditto Middle Eastern cuisine. I don't know the best way to fix it, but removal of "other cuisines" is probably not the best way to do this, particularly in light of the obvious nationalist arguments between Turkish and Greek nationalists, which is a concern of mine on articles like this. Dougweller (talk) 09:11, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greece in the lead & nationalist arguments 

message: I have an issue with the terminology in this article, guys. It is some time I've read a comment by Macrakis above ("Rubbish! "Gemista" simply means "stuffed"), and, since then, I am thinking again and again about it and something just does not work properly. In the past, I had in mind my Greek experience, but now I also have my Bulgarian-tasting one, and I think I can be more concrete and accurate:
Both in Greece and in Bulgaria, when we say "dolma" we mean rice or/and mince meat wrapped with cabbage or vine leaves. So, in Turkish "dolma" may mean "stuffed", but in the Greek and the Bulgarian culinary traditions this dish is not conceived as "stuffed" but as "wrapped". "Stuffed" (γεμιστά [gemista] in Greek – I don't remember now the Bulgarian term) is a different dish, where tomatoes, peppers and other vegetables are indeed stuffed with rice or/and mince meat (in this case you don't wrap the rice, but you stuff the vegetables with it. It might me trivia for somebody not familiar with Balkan cuisine, but in the Balkans (at least in these two countries I know) these are two different, two clearly distinctive dishes.
I thus think that the article should reflect that; it should make clear that not only in Greece, but in at least two Balkan countries "gemista" and "dolma" are not only called differently, but, additionally, they are regarded as two distinctive dishes (and IMO this is completely understandable, because they are based on a completely different logic and cooking preparation). Creating another article for "gemista" could also be another thought, but this is not my main problem.--Yannismarou (talk) 20:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, Macrakis is a wise man, if I were you I would listen to him. Other than that, just as there are Dolma and Sarma articles here from the Turkish/Ottoman kitchen you may also make your own Gemista article and even present it in 2 sections like Gemista 1 (Sarmales?) and Gemista 2 (Dolmades) or with whatever names you prefer; but please refrain from making manipulative or degenerating changes in the existing Dolma and Sarma articles. Simply create your own "Greek kitchen" gemista (stuffed) articles... --E4024 (talk) 21:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: What changes? What are you talking about? Did you even read what I wrote? I don't want to create any article; I did not even try to edit this article, instead I started a new discussion in the talk page if you noticed it. What I say is that "dolma" is conceived in a different way in Turkey and in some other countries (such as Greece and Bulgaria) and this should be reflected in the article. You can give your preachings about avoiding manipulative or degenerating changes to some newbie in WP; as far as I am concerned, after 6 years in WP and 7 FA nominations I do not accept such advice (which I obviously regard it as offensive in the way it is articulated). Do you have anything to add as regards the substance of what I wrote or not?--Yannismarou (talk) 21:11, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Although you are still shouting after 6 years I will answer: There are two words (in Turkish for these Turkish dishes), 1. Sarma (wrapped), 2. Dolma (stuffed). These are the two "correct" denominations for the two different preparations. (You may call whichever of them the way you wish in Greek.) On the other hand, there is the other (and more important) division: Dolmas and Sarmas made with only rice and eaten cold and the other Dolmas and Sarmas made with minced meat (and a bit of rice) and eaten hot (or warm if you wish). These latter versions are generally consumed with a garlic yoğurt sauce, while the cold dishes are consumed with lemon. So you have 4 different plate categories to name. You may call whichever of these as Gemista (1, 2, 3, 4). We make a differentiation by using the word "yalancı" in the case of cold "Dolma(s)" and "zeytinyağlı" in the case of Sarmas (like Zeytinyağlı Yaprak Sarma, Zeytinyağlı Lahana Sarma) etc. At least now you learned (maybe, if you already did not know) something about the Turkish kitchen. Sorry for the "lecturing" tone; déformations professionnelles... --E4024 (talk) 21:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I know a lot about Turkish cuisine, but in any case thank you for the free lessons. Now, what exactly have to do these lessons with what I wrote about Greece, Bulgaria and the gemista/dolma terminology in these two countries? Obviously nothing! How can I not shout when you are so off topic?! You are analyzing me sarma and dolma in the Turkish cusine, when I am speaking about Greece and Bulgaria!--Yannismarou (talk) 21:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

text: Pre-emptive strikes, filemou; I like Dolma and Sarma as they are made in Turkey, I like a a Grilled Octopus made by a Greek cook. That is the issue. --E4024 (talk) 21:47, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't understand the issue, my friend; so I don't see any reason continuing this discussion with you. Somebody else may have a better grasp of such culinary issues and may thus contribute some really useful feedback and not pointless jokes. In any case, do not worry; nobody questions the Turkish rights on dolma and sarma. However, I suppose you have noticed that the article is not only about Turkish dolma but about the whole culinary tradition of such dishes in the Balkans and the East.--Yannismarou (talk) 21:51, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I know the area of Turkish cultural influence, thank you. And good night. --E4024 (talk) 22:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dolma - Gemista 

message: I added a citation from this article explaining the practice where vegetarian dolmades are often called 'fake.'  I deleted the not in citation template from a previous sentence in that same section because the aforementioned and now cited news article explained the etymology as well.  Undead q (talk) 02:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated citation about 'fake dolma' 

message: The leaves for wrapped dolmas made from "vine" leaves are not specified other than grape. Are there other kinds of vine leaves used? If not, it should be clear that "vine leaves" refers exclusively to grape vine leaves.68.199.97.145 (talk) 22:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What vines other than grape? 

message: I think that the recent edits at Dolma are problematic for the following reasons:
*The source used to support the Armenian origin says explicitly that Armenians have an idiosincracy in admitting that dolma is a turkish word. The chapter about Tolma is called "Linguistics and politics", so from the title itself this ethimology is relativised. 
*The other source (Russian) is assertive: in other words, it does not present any documentation, fact or reference to support the Armenian origins of the dish. It should be noticed that this article has no history section, since the dish is present everywhere in the Middle East and surrounding areas (from Central Asia to the Balkans), and finding its origin is very difficult. Additions clarifying the origin of the dish are welcome, but should bring references (i.e., the presence of tolma in an Armenian cookbook prior to the Turkish migration) and not generic - patrioctic sentences. It should not be difficult to find in the works of the referred Russian historian the demonstration of his thesis about the Armenian origin of this dish. About these two points, please see the comment of Macrakis below;
*As a result, all these edits (included the alternate name "Tolma" in bold) give undue weight to the Armenian origin;
*The locution Armenian Plateau, should be removed from the introduction, since it is redundant. This plateau belongs to Turkey (Middle East) and Armenia (Middle East or Caucasus), so there is no reason to have it there. By the way, the geographic belonging of the Armenian Highlands to the Middle East is referenced in the wikipedia article.
Below you can find the opinion of a fellow user about the Armenian origin of the name "Dolma". Alex2006 (talk) 11:39, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The name of a food can be a useful hint about the food's origin, but it is just one piece of evidence among others. And of course the word history has to be studied just as critically as anything else. The sources given in the dolma article for a supposed origin as Armenian toli 'leaf' are not very strong, and not very convincing. Where is the documentation? Why would toli become tolma? For another example of a dubious and forced food etymology, see the supposed Coptic etymology for falafel (and the corresponding discussion on the Talk page). For that matter, there are Greeks who refuse to believe that γύρος is a calque of Turkish döner -- but it used to be called ντονέρ in Greek! --Macrakis (talk) 02:54, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid I don't read Armenian. Perhaps an editor who does can check the source (an Armenian dictionary) in the wiktionary article, which apparently gives Turkish as the origin of the Armenian word dolma/tolma. --Macrakis (talk) 20:26, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Toli had evolved from Tolimis to Tolim to Tolima and to Tolma (Dolma). The evolution goes back to the Urartu kingdom, which would confirm its Armenian origins. --Steverci (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that you can usefully read this thread, in order to understand why there is no consensus for this insertion. Please answer (with sources) to the questions above, and afterwards we can reopen this discussion about this alternate hypothesis of the word`s origin. Alex2006 (talk) 06:39, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits at Dolma 

message: It doesn't seem that not mentioning the term "dolmades" anywhere in this article is a good idea. 173.89.236.187 (talk) 03:00, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dolmades" not mentioned in this article 

message: Images on the page are not of Dolma but of Sarma. Dolma images should be used.--95.10.73.89 (talk) 03:12, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You are totally right about that, and they should be removed to avoid confusions.  Avonrepus (talk) 05:55, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images on the Article 

message: This issue is also mentioned above. The images in the page, none of of them are dolma. They are sarma. They are different. Therefore I will update the pictures and put dolma pictures instead of sarma. I strongly believe that to avoid this confusion, we should not put any picture of sarma.Avonrepus (talk) 05:55, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion between Dolma and Sarma 

message: Proposing adding Armenian definition of the name, which is the oldest one. --Forsytor (talk) 01:38, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The middle link does not look like a reliable source, and I am not sure about the other two. I will wait for other cognizant editors to chime in. Just plain Bill (talk) 01:21, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Here are more both reliable and neutral. Clearly enough coverage to at least include it. --Forsytor (talk) 01:38, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither one of those items directly addresses the issue in a dispositive manner. The second one is essentially fluff. Let's wait a while, to give others a chance to respond. The topic is a contentious one and needs careful treatment. With that said, I do not object to adding a sourced etymology of tolma as long as it does not involve removing mention of Turkish or Azeri usage, to pick two not-so-random examples. Just plain Bill (talk) 06:20, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. --Forsytor (talk) 17:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: I think we can merge Sogan-dolma here - it just means "stuffed onion" - no need to make a separate article for each vegetable. Seraphim System (talk) 07:28, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we can't merge the two. They are very different dishes. the eloquent peasant (talk) 21:44, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Then I changed my vote.. I was thinking of something else. Yes. I agree to merge.. the eloquent peasant (talk) 14:06, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: In "Variants" section it says: "Stuffed vine leaves without meat are sometimes called yalancı dolma, which means "liar's dolma" in Turkish.[24]" I have doubts about this translation. Because it is more correct to translate yalancı dolma as "fake dolma" in English. The author of the source might have misunderstood the meaning as he/she was probably not a native Turkish speaker. I would suggest to replace "liar's dolma" with "fake dolma" and remove the source or to keep the source and translation but also add the "fake dolma" as a translation option, which I believe most native speakers would agree is a better one. --89MsHm(talk) 10:04, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Liar's or fake dolma

message: It is pretty amazing, and I give them an A+ for both effort and audacity. But as of this writing the Turkocentric frauds of wikipedia have managed to render one of the main pillars of traditional Armenian cuisine as pretty much completely irrelevant as being part of Armenian heritage and culture. (This is in fact not limited to Dolma, but pretty much all other Armenian food items that are 'shared' between the two in wikipedia articles). The number one weapon of choice: "it is named in Turkish! How could it not be Turkish!". Of course only a child, or ignoramus would state this who is uneducated in the history of Asia Minor. (A large number if not the majority of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire spoke Turkish as their native tongue for centuries, and as such, "Turkish" became unintelligible with all other Turkic languages of Central Asia, and over time Armenian foods in turn became 'Turkified'). For context imagine that the Poles and Germans started both claiming that the Bagel (and many other such foods etymologically German) are Polish or German because, well, it was made in Poland and is from a German word! There would be mass outrage and quite laughable. This is EXACTLY the argument Turks and Azeris are making in this article with their very calculated deletion of anything relating to 'Armenian': "The word is Turkish, also UNESCO says Dolmas were made in Azerbaijan!". This article essentially weasels itself into making a reader believe that grape leaves - completely absent from any traditional culinary cultures of Turkic tribes of Central Asia - is somehow "Turkic", meaning, it was therefore only consumed AFTER the arrival of Turks, nomadic tribes who magically showed the ignorant settled Armenians how to make use of all aspects of the grape, and all while we need to conveniently ignore several thousand years of Armenian history, grape cultivation and wine making in the region.
And hey, for good measure, let's throw in "Azerbaijan"! After all if UNESCO says something it must be true, right? Never mind that Azerbaijan has to always *purchase* history and culture with oil revenues. Well, it obviously worked since Azerbaijan was only created for the first time in history in the 1920s in the region, and before that it was part of the Russian Empire, and before that Persian Empire, and before that part of Greater Armenia 2,000 years ago, and yet stuffed grape leaves must still be a 20th century phenomenon in order to conform with "Azeri history". After all, Azerbaijan says it and therefore it must be true. Well, actually, we must be grateful for the efforts of Azerbaijan, because it shows the completely fraudulent nature of both Turkish and Azeri claims since these two claims contradict one another, thus revealing the fraud at play. The entire history of Turkic 'nationhood' is not more than about 500 years old in Asia Minor, and three or four centuries more with nomadic tribal incursions. No one ever even heard of a "Turk" in Asia Minor before about 1000AD. Thus in so many words this article is making the bold claim that the ancient practice of Armenians eating grape leaves is in fact not ancient, but relatively new, and introduced by "Turkic culture" upon their arrival.
And of course, this entire article has no relevant sources for making such claims, I would in fact argue almost every "source" is dubious and unusable. Next even the dubious sources are bypassed. Example: "dolma itself most likely has its roots in the cuisine of the Ottoman Topkapı Palace". Yeah, OK, phrases like "most likely" are definitely credible sources. And oh let's not forget the biased and unreliable fraud of a "scholar" aka "friend of the Turks" Charles Perry, a journalist turned paid propagandist for Turkey, and supposedly a "historian" working for Turkish "Cornucopia magazine" - yeah, surely not biased at all when your "research" is tied to your income, after all he is sporting an Anglo name, what's more credible than that?. I have checked some of the history including some page edits here, and sure enough all the sources citing Armenian heritage and/or sources have been deleted as "unreliable". Considering the ridiculous and poor quality of this pathetic current article, that is quite laughable actually. And the reason always cited is, because we want to "prevent nationalism".
Oh cool, yeah let's prevent the "nationalism" of the nation under appropriation, but completely allow the nationalism of the newer nation trying to do the appropriating, merely for what, succeeding in "making Turkey for the Turks" in the early 20th century? What a brilliant plan. Preventing a nationalist conflict is one thing and I'm all for it if reason and logic is used, but you blow the entire plot when you take the other side which is a worse form of that nationalism, and needless to say based on false history and unproven half-truths. Yeah, Armenia is a little country now with 3 million population, and Turkey is a large country with 80 million, with a gigantic army of "wikipedia historians" and their associated supporters everywhere. That still does not change true historical facts, and this article is one giant ball of bias and dishonesty dedicated to pushing the Turkish and Azeri pseudo-nationalistic narrative. For now I am not rewriting the article yet but leaving this information here as information for future editors who are not working for Turkish interests to not fall into this trap and who wish to rewrite this article in a balanced way that conforms to sanity and reason - or - I am all in favor for presenting the history as disputed between the different parties. Also, for a more credible Armenian-culture-sided source I recall George Mardikian writing about historicity of Dolma/Tolma/Sarma in Armenian folklore in one of his books which most definitely needs to be in this article That source is more credible that all the "sources" in this article combined. Sure Editor (talk) 10:16, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  This Entire Article is Extremely Biased with Fake "Turkish" History 

message: Hallo,
I re-added Italy in the list of countries where dolma are present. Actually, in the central and Italian cuisine there are many stuffed vegetables dishes, prepared with onions, peperoni, aubergines, zucchini, etc., named collectively as ripieni. Many among them are quite similar to the Turkish ones. The only dolma type which is not present in the Italian cuisine is that wrapped in cabbage rolls or vine leaves. Due to that, one should decide how to organize this subject: we could either leave this article as it is, expanding the part about Italy, or create another article about the ripieni. Actually I prefer the first option, because Italian and middle-east dolma dishes are basically (with the above exception) variations of the same dish. Alex2006 (talk) 06:47, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, this means that someone should write an article about Italian ripieni. :-) Alex2006 (talk) 05:55, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italian ripieni 

message: I'm a bit confused by your edits to the etymology section. In this edit, you say:
:The section is about etymology recent edits have removed the etymology related content cited to oxford reference and replaced it with grammatical content from grammar books about the parts of speech WP:NOTDICTIONARY, please explain the reason for these changes and the removal of oxford reference on the talk page.)
As you say, this is an etymology section, so naturally it should be using high-quality sources about word derivation. That has nothing to do with WP:NOTDICT. The most reliable sources for language-related issues are language dictionaries and solid reference grammars like G.L. Lewis's. Though Ayto's Diner's Dictionary is a good source for many food-related questions, Lewis and Ağralı are better sources for the language-related issue here. BTW, both Ayto and Lewis were published by Oxford. I also wonder why, in a previous edit, ​you removed Lewis in favor of Ağralı, which is a language textbook, not a reference grammar.
The text you prefer says that dolma is "derived from the verb dolmak ("to fill")". Well, Lewis and Ağralı are just a bit more specific about how it is derived: it is a verbal noun. I don't see what's problematic about that. Also, the language authorities gloss dolmak as 'to be filled' (Lewis) or 'to get full' (Ağralı). --Macrakis (talk) 16:03, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's like saying the etymology of "jumping" is "to jump". The word "derive" seems to be creating the confusion here, so it might be helpful to get clear on the difference between verb conjugations and word origins. The latter is found in dictionaries, while the former is the subject of reference grammars. It's not a problem with the reliability of the source but how it has been used. Spudlace (talk) 00:22, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Derivation is a word formation mechanism often mentioned in etymologies, not to be confused with conjugation (i.e., inflection). A "wedding" (a noun for the ceremony), for example, is indeed derived from "wed", though it can also function as a regular gerund or participle. I don't know why you prefer a linguist specializing in English (Ayto) to one specializing in Turkish (Lewis) for the origin of a Turkish word. --Macrakis (talk) 15:04, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  John Ayto is an etymologist and the Chief Etymologist of a major English Language dictionary. The Diner's Dictionary: Word Origins of Food and Drink is a compendium of food word etymologies. Spudlace (talk) 22:51, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, exactly. He is a specialist in English. The question here is the relationship of the form dolma to dolmak, which is about Turkish. Lewis is a specialist in Turkish. --Macrakis (talk) 23:11, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymology

message: My preference for an etymology section about a dish like this would be a section that addresses how the meaning of the word has changed over time and entered the countless languages where it is used today, where different words can be used for the same dish, and the same word used for different dishes across cultures. 
Do you guys find this kind of content interesting or think it is something we should expand? I'm worried about two things: I think it would be uninteresting for the average reader and I haven't been able to find reliable sources to expand the section. As an alternative, I want to merge the short etymology section into another sections where it would be less discordant. Spudlace (talk) 00:52, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an interesting topic, though at that point, perhaps "etymology" wouldn't be the best title for the section; maybe "Names" or "Word history"? Some languages use synonyms for dolma (mahshi), others borrow the Turkish word with variations (tolma). As you say, some languages conflate sarma and dolma. In Greek, a synonym is used for stuffed foods (gemista) and the Turkish word is used for the wrapped foods called sarma in Turkish (ntolmades). It would be great to discuss this all together if we can find a reliable source for it. --Macrakis (talk) 15:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

text: PS On the other hand, I don't see the interest in mentioning the Turkic dialect versions unless they're part of a larger discussion on variants. --Macrakis (talk) 15:19, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely agree on removing the Turkic dialects because the source doesn't give any information on whether the word is for stuffed foods or wraps. Otherwise I have been looking for reliable sources to expand but section but I haven't found any yet so I am just going to merge the sections for now. Spudlace (talk) 22:45, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does this article need an etymology section? 

message: Please don't treat Slavic similar dishes as a "name" for another similar dish from Jewish cuisine, as Slavs treat pork as a cheaper substitute for beef, ergo: not kosher. 2A00:1FA0:46A4:8453:0:5B:2F64:2601 (talk) 05:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Cabbage roll]]s 

message: why it still counts like azerbaijani food? have nothing to do with that pigs 91.205.198.137 (talk) 10:30, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  origins  

message: Tolma is an Armenian food.
Tolma is a food that was prepared in pagan Armenia before our era. The word "tol" (տոլ) in Armenian means bush or leaf and was dedicated to pagan gods. 217.76.12.50 (talk) 08:18, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenian Tolma 

message: Benelorm (talk) 05:57, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog (talk) 08:20, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 6 April 2024