Talk:Toruń gingerbread

Thorner Lebkuchen, Pfefferkuchen

History backround for gingerbread, spice cookies Honigkuchen (honey cakes-cookies), Lebkuchen, Pfefferkuchen [1]

---

Mmm, thanks for making an article on this! I had a look on the website in the article (the town's official site) and moved the article to the name used on the English-language part of the website. If predominant English-language use can be shown to be otherwise however, feel free to change to something more suitable. Knepflerle 12:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, first of all, calling it gingerbread is rather inaccurate, Lebkuchen is closer. Also, while Poles may insinuate that its a Polish recipe from a Polish town, and English use often copies that (up to Toruń pierniki), it clearly is connected to the city's German tradition and the German name, Thorn. Thus, the traditional name should be used, as the treaty of Versailles does not require amnesia of traditional recipes. Google books reflects this, even when narrowed down to post-WW2 era and Copernicus. Also, English does hardly uses the Polish diacritics anyway.

• +gingerbread +Toruń 2
• +gingerbread +Torun 33
• +gingerbread +Thorn 473
• Thorn Copernicus gingerbread date:1945-2007 6
• Torun Copernicus gingerbread date:1945-2007 14

-- Matthead ^discuß!     O       15:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Few issues with the above-

1. Gingerbread is slightly imprecise - it's one of those things for which English has no native word to translate it - Gingerbread isn't wrong per se, it just includes some very un-Lebkuchen/un-piernik type things too in its remit. In English-speaking countries I've seen Lebkuchen sold as Lebkuchen, piernik sold as piernik, and both sold as gingerbread. Usage is variable, and on en.wiki I think an English interpretation will help the reader, and worth the slight loss in precision. If a non-English non-translation is used, I see no particular reason to use Lebkuchen over piernik either.
2. Google books doesn't back up your argument at all well when you really analyse the hits. 'Thorn' throws up many false positives, due to its far more common meaning [[spine{botany)]]. Once these are excluded there's little in it pre-1945, and in modern era usage Toruń has the edge.
3. Unfortunately it seems you can't use Google Books to analyse the diacritic usage - the optical character recognition doesn't seem to distinguish n and ń. In fact, if you look at your results *+gingerbread +Torun, the first four where you can see the original text all use Toruń! (the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th). One day they might get round to refining their search engine and OCR a bit more, but I can't see much advantage from their side. I think there's a decent case for sticking with Toruń, and using redirects for non-diacritics versions to make sure people can find the article easily. Knepflerle 19:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Couple of mistakes

The article has a couple of mistakes:

• Katarzynki are just a brand of Pierniki Torunskie, not Pierniki themselfs.
• Pierniki Torunskie aren't based on German Nuremberg product, but are seperate creation. In fact during Middle Ages their recipe was guarded as secret from German cities.
• Also never heard of them being considered part of German cousine rather then Polish. Is there any reference for that ?

But those errors will soon be corrected as I will expand the article.--Molobo 21:35, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

"also known as Polish gingerbread"

The gingerbread isn't ", also known as Polish gingerbread,". Stop adding it, Molobo and Space Cadet.[2] [3] [4] It's supposedly supported by one source, as if that was enough, and even that source doesn't say it was also known as "Polish gingerbread". All the source says - and it is the only time that "Polish gingerbread" appears in it - is, after it had written something about Torun gingerbread, it says: "The Polish gingerbread story has an interesting twist that is outside the scope of this study but relevant to the ways in which Poles took foreign ideas and reinvented them." Sciurinæ (talk) 20:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

A new source, a new joke - published in 1941 by the "Polish information center". It says: "The Poles used honey instead of sugar and for medical purposes. They also used mead and used honey to make bread. This bread has come down to modern times as the delicate and delicious "Piernik," or Polish gingerbread." It makes no reference to Torun gingerbread, not even to the city Thorn, Torun or Toruń, but that's okay. ... No, I'm just kidding. Sciurinæ (talk) 22:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Verifiability

Seeing the recent edits, please provide a source for the edits, everybody, if you don't want to get them deleted as unverifiable again. Sciurinæ (talk) 21:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

(Sigh)

Since it doesn't seem like either Space Cadet or Molobo is thinking of explaining this edit beyond making an accusation of "disruptive behaviour", let me try another time:

As for its oh-so-well-known name of Torun gingerbread as Polish gingerbread, see above, still unanswered. Edit warring does not make it better sourced.

The Talk:Gdansk/Vote dictates the use of double naming. How many times, actually it's more like years, should I say this to you? It's up to you to prove that the necessary spices were brought for the gingerbread over seventy years before traces of its existence were traceable.

You said the sentence about the route was OR, but why don't you just look into the source Molobo founded the whole text on (except for example that sentence): "Of course, there would be no gingerbread without the root spices, which unfortunately had to be brought from remote countries - mainly India, by the trail that led through the Black Sea and Lwów to Germany, where the spices were transported by north-German trade companies. Some of the spices were also brought from Gdańsk."

Regarding the piece "The early Polish people used honey instead of sugar and apllied medicine. A special kind of bread was also made from honey and mead. This special kind of bread was called "Piernik"", WP:NOR dictates: "to demonstrate that you are not presenting original research, you must cite reliable sources that provide information directly related to the topic of the article." (emphasis not mine) I wouldn't know how that "reliable source"'s info is directly related without even mentioning Torun gingerbread once.

What on earth does the "(Toruński piernik)" do in "The first mention of Torun gingerbread(Toruński piernik) comes from 1380"? If that really was the first mention, as implied, provide a source. Sciurinæ (talk) 23:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced claims

On 3 November 2007 83.27.75.103 (talk · contribs) from "Neostrada Plus, Wroclaw, Poland" completely rewrote the article, removing most mentions of the German background of Thorner Lebkuchen, while adding a "in Polish culture" section. Barely any sources were provided, nor were enough added since. -- Matthead  Discuß   05:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Grammar?

Is gingerbread countable in English? I'd say it isn't generally, but the article occasionally makes it countable. 89.70.85.121 (talk) 15:00, 22 December 2015 (UTC)