Talk:Sopaipilla

Spelling of "sopapilla"

Is it "sopapilla" or "sopaipilla"? Which one is correct?

Both are used routinely. The presumed roots of the word (see article) in the word "sopaipa" or "xopaipa" argues for the spelling with the I as the original, and therefore preferred, spelling. IMO it could go either way. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 15:14, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

The Sopapilla in Texas

Can someone tell me why the Sopaipilla, which is Texas's state food, is only referenced as belonging to New Mexico exclusively in the United States. I am not buying it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.113.131.65 (talk) 22:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

What they call a sopaipilla in Texas is rather different than what you find in New Mexico, at least in my experience. Wschart (talk) 05:00, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you describe? If the difference is significant, a section might be added to the article. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 14:24, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't give this article much credence either. Just about every Mexican restaurant where I've eaten in Colorado serves sopaipillas. They are what this article calls New Mexican style sopaipillas, but we eat them as dessert, while in New Mexico they eat them instead of tortillas as bread with a meal. ToddBradley (talk) 04:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The Sopapilla is different in many places. The best ones are soft and puffy and there should be bottles of honey nearby! The best method in my opinion is to pull them apart and pour honey into the middle parts. Yumm! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.143.90.238 (talk) 04:11, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to know why there's no mention of Arizona in this either. There are sopapillas in Arizona too, and probably in most Western states. I grew up in Arizona eating them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.41.253 (talk) 01:04, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

The answer is simple - basically wiki writers, editors, etc. treat with disdain anything American. As in, well Americans don't know diddly about traditional foods so there's no point in even attempting to adqequately cover the topic wrt to U.S. trends, etc. - about the only consolation is that this article doesn't appear to have yet been rewritten in UK English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.17 (talk) 15:28, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Argentine, USA, and Chilean sopaipillas

Some users seems to believe that sopaipillas is something uniquely North American and has errased (twice) all info about sopaipillas in the southern cone. If somebody has any reason to agree with the removal plaese explain it here. Dentren | ^Talk 02:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced. If you have references to support your claims, please begin citing them so long as they meet our standards for reliable sources. JBsupreme (talk) 05:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Please tell me wich wikipolicy your are based your removal. Not being sourced is not alone a reason to remove material. Dentren | ^Talk 15:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

In any event, I did add an extlink with info on a Chilean sopaipilla recipe that demonstrates clearly that it's a different thing than a New Mexican sopaipilla. You removed that. You're way out of line here, JB. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 16:53, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the removal. Dentren | ^Talk 18:54, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

This article is not about a specific style over the other. If they are both "different" (Those are minor differences; they are called the same and both are fried dough) then that is why different subsections were created. If you want to create a specific article for the New Mexican style of this food, you can go ahead and do that.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 17:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

The point isn't the "different" part; it's that the process of documenting/referencing the South American version had started, and got rolled back -- quite incorrectly, IMO. My preference, which I believe User:Dentren shares, is for there to be one sopaipilla article that covers the various regional/national interpretations of what that means. We are on the way to having that, but it keeps getting -- there's no other way to put it -- vandalized. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 17:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Bill, this is a start class article. How can you expect for an article to develop if there is such a strict control for sources. If you want to write a "GA" or "FA" class article, it will require more information; and that information can only be gathered over time with the help of other editors who contribute their knowledge to the project. Vandalism refers to acts that purposely include wrong information into an article. The information thus far included is by no means vandalism.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 17:45, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I think you're misunderstanding me, Marshal. I agree completely with what you said. It was the wholesale deletion of stuff in that start-class article -- not by you -- that I found, and find, objectionable. Your contributions are fine, and have improved the article. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 18:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I apologize then Bill, I did misunderstand you. I also agree with your neutral perspective on this matter and provide my support for such actions.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:18, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Please don't complain about "strict control over sources" -- just provide reliable sources and we can move on. WP:V is policy. JBsupreme (talk) 19:43, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

It is entirely clear that this is getting out of hand (and it is clear to everyone but you that you're doing this in a ridiculously heavy-handed way -- who named you king?). I have therefore requested informal mediation to try to get the issues aired, and get some impartial eyes on the article and what has been going on here. This is getting ridiculous. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 20:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Sopaipilla sources

I think we all here agreen on the re-addition of Chilean, Argentine and other sopaipillas. I propose here to post souces, when enought it provided we add them into the articles lead and new respective sub-sections. Globalize template should remain until that happens. Dentren | ^Talk 18:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

• List of sources

• Chilean-style Sopaipillas - Pumpkin Fritters, About.com - low source reliability, but correct information. Describes recipe and a little bit when it is eaten.
• Sopaipillas, Chileguia source is in Spanish. Chile-promotial site. Low reliabitlity but information seems reseanable accurate. Speaks about its preparation, pebre and chancaca.
• ¿Por qué se llaman como se llaman?, Mujer, La Tercera - source in Spanish. Informally written but owns some credibility since Mujer is part of La Tercera newspaper. Explains etymology and that it was eaten in Chile in 1726.

• Sorry to have to be the one to enforce policy here, but the notion that "start class" articles are somehow exempt from WP:V policy is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. That said, I think we're making good progress here (I have added some sources myself) and this article will soon be on its way (and in compliance with editorial policy as well). Thanks everyone in advance for your cooperation and understanding. JBsupreme (talk) 19:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

You're deleting information just because it is unsourced. If that is the way you want to edit articles, you are definately not making any progress to Wikipedia.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 19:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Agree with Marshal, JB, is being to impatient (he has however realized now the existence of sopaipillas outside the empire). Cool down the article will be fine soon. Dentren | ^Talk 18:07, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Varieties of Sopapillas

I grew up enjoying the stuffed beef and cheese sopapillas as shown in this picture, from La Paloma in Heath, Ohio. I think they're great. But, whenever I've asked for a "sopapilla" at just about every other Mexican Restaurant I've ever been to, the sopapillas were almost ALWAYS a dessert made from a fried crispy type of bread that was usually topped with sugar and honey. Then, I started looking up more information on these things, and found that stuffed meat sopapillas are not as common as the dessert sopapillas. In most places, it seems that a "sopapilla" is a dessert. If you don't believe me, go to a bunch of different Mexican (or other Hispanic) restaurants and check it out for yourself. Google recipes and see how many of them are desserts compared to how many of them are the stuffed meal types. Most seem to consider the sopapilla to be a dessert, with a few exceptions. Some stuffed meal sopapillas can be found in the southwestern United States and elsewhere. The dessert sopapillas are nice, but I much prefer the stuffed meal sopapillas. That's just a personal preference. Nevertheless, I think both (and all other) types of sopapillas should definitely be discussed in the article. Also, I think the article should discuss the differences, as well as discuss which types are more commonly found in different areas. I think the article was all right this way, when I last edited it on December 15, 2009. I'm sure it could've been better. But right now, it doesn't seem too clear about the different types and varieties. I'm pleased that my picture is now the main image for the article, but it should probably be in a lower section of the article that specifically discusses the stuffed meal sopapillas, and a picture of a dessert sopapilla should probably be used as the main image for the article. Well, that's my opinion. Leepaxton (talk) 08:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Tortas fritas

I did my best to depict more aspects of the sopaipillas or tortas fritas that are made on Uruguay. Understand that my english sometimes rolls back on lack of use as I spect you not to roll back the article. I added some cultural aspects that where somehow omitted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neurorebel (talk • contribs) 08:21, 4 March 2017 (UTC) --Neurorebel (talk) 08:26, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sopaipilla. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100329142826/http://mujer.latercera.com/2009/10/18/01/contenido/23_546_9.html to http://mujer.latercera.com/2009/10/18/01/contenido/23_546_9.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110426044739/http://www.montevideo.gub.uy/ciudad/cultura/costumbres/torta-frita-cuando-llueve to http://www.montevideo.gub.uy/ciudad/cultura/costumbres/torta-frita-cuando-llueve

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:28, 25 December 2017 (UTC)