Talk:Sriracha

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

"Cock sauce"

To anyone who wants to keep adding "also known as Cock sauce" to the article, please note that we have two articles - this one, and Sriracha sauce (Huy Fong Foods). It is the US Huy Fong brand (widely considered synonymous with Sriracha sauce in the US) that is often known as Cock sauce or Rooster sauce (because of the brand logo), and that is clearly stated in the Sriracha sauce (Huy Fong Foods) article. The generic Thai-origin Sriracha sauce, which exists in the form of many different brands in SE Asia, and in the rest of the world outside of the US, is *not* generically known as Cock sauce or Rooster sauce. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:24, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's a good and true point, and I may
fail to assume good faith here, but I think that anons adding "Cock sauce" to this article are just trolls who like to see the word in print. Elizium23 (talk) 15:31, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply
]
You might be right - I guess we can always semi-protect the article if it continues. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like a pretty lame effort at brand advertising to me. Sriracha sauce is much bigger than Huy Fong Foods and doesn't need the association. (xtc283Xtc283 (talk) 00:15, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lay's Sriracha Flavor

Lay's Sriracha flavor is just one of a number of prepared foods using Sriracha sauce. There is nothing particularly unique about Lay's preparation, save perhaps their marketing skills, and it is my opinion it does not warrant a mention here. But if the consensus is that a mention of their potato chips should remain, I'll go ahead and balance out the article and enter a number of other example preparations and marketings of food with sriracha flavor. Marteau (talk) 21:08, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think such things are of sufficient importance to include. As a comparison, we have an article about cheese but it doesn't list promotional campaigns for cheese-flavoured products. Also, in this example it would add undue weight to US promotional activity when Sriracha sauce really isn't an American product at all - it's an Asian sauce, and the vast majority of the world's production and consumption is outside the US. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:26, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merger

In 2011, this article was forked to create

talk 12:00, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

It seems to me, both anecdotally as a member of U.S.A. culture and via Google search results, that the 'Huy Fong Foods' variety is actually more notable (in en.Wikipedia) than the general category. If there is to be a merger, I'd suggest that the general article be folded into Huy Fong. Or one could simply respect the rationale of those who made the split in the first place and leave it as is.
p.s.— It was a web article — here's a link — which someone had posted to Facebook which led me to take a wander into the Sriracha sauce wiki pages. As well as being an example—by way of its own existence—the article also provides a number of hyperlinks and statistics to emphasize [independent] notability to its own readership.
--
talk) 16:08, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
p.p.s.— The replies to Talk:Sriracha_sauce_(Huy_Fong_Foods)#This is Advertising! seem to address practical reasons for separation, as well as general notability.
--21:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


Scott
, do you still feel that a merger is warranted enough to invest effort in changing the status quo?
If so, please elaborate as to 'why' you feel so, and 'how' you propose going about it.
If not—if you're willing to allow the articles to remain independent—please remove the 'merge' tag from the Sriracha_sauce_(Huy_Fong_Foods) article.
Or ... ?
I guess, in part, I'm simply wondering if you (User:Scott Martin) are still taking an interest in the proposed merger and the relative articles?
--
talk) 04:11, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
]


Proposed merger: Request for Comment

NO ACTION
Consensus seems to oppose merger.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There's a proposal to—once again—merge

talk) 17:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep separate: I'm inclined to keep the articles separate in order to maintain the distinction between a style category and a specific widely known brand name product. To do otherwise seems—to me—a bit like merging
Birds
.
Also, keeping 'as is' would respect the impetus to reduce confusion which inspired—in part—the forking of the two articles in the first place.
--
talk) 17:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
An editor has removed the merge proposal template. This along with comments above seems to indicate that consensus has been reached to oppose a merger. I'll 'comment out' the RfC template and mark this thread concluded. --
talk) 07:52, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Origin of Sriraja Panich

It would seem that all the so-called research comes down to what seems to be a press release by Theparos Sauce that can be found here -> http://www.virtualpressoffice.com/JPContentAccessServlet?fileContentId=1000000031309&source=sd&showId=1206207880303. Is it necessary to mention the wisebread blog as a reliable source if all they do is to rehash press releases? Or even just rehashing the Bon Apettit article? - Takeaway (talk) 11:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was also kinda' thinking the original wisebread.com reference was looking sorta' like a redundant appendage once all the cruft had been trimmed outta' it. And as it provided the Bon Appétit link in the first place ... yeah, I'll trim that out.
I'm inclined to wonder if it had been originally placed—with its "expert PhD."
Simpson's pun' name choice. Doh! [Ah, I also just noticed that it was actually a different IP
that added the spurious bits.]
Anyway, I think it's interesting to note the existence of an origin story as long as it's revealed that its source is involved in marketing the sauce.
Takeaway, what's the source (site, article?) address of that PDF link from Theparos Sauce? It's anomalous. The browser I'm using (Chrome) generally previews 'normal' (.pdf) PDF file links but that one goes straight to initiating an offer to download. It'd be of interest to me to have some provenance on the "SRIRAJA PANICH, the Original “Sriracha” Chili Sauce" press release/advert itself.
--
talk) 09:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply
]
The Bon Appetit article seems to be the original article, with the writer having been sent samples by the distributor. It is highly probable that the wisebread.com article is based on the Bon Appetit as it appears 3 weeks later, and seems to be a compilation of the Bon Appetit article "The Original Siracha" and their own take on the Bon Appetit "25 New Ways to Use Siracha". I think that the wisebread.com reference can be dismissed as it's a derivative of the Bon Appetit article.
The only piece of information that is somewhat encyclopaedic, is the name of the originator of the Sriraja Panich sauce. Although implied, it still isn't clear that Ms. Thanom Chakkapak created the sauce. All that can be deduced is that she was the first to commercialise it. Perhaps the text should reflect this.
The press release seems to be a complete stand-alone. Neither the Eastland Food nor the Thai Theparos websites host it, and neither website mentions anything about Ms. Thanom Chakkapak. I think that this press release was thrown together recently by Eastland Food, perhaps even especially for the Bon Appetit article which copies ad verbatim whole sections of it. I've tried verifying Ms. Thanom Chakkapak's name in Thai script but I haven't been successful. Ether I got the transcription into Thai wrong or she might be a figment of the imagination of someone in marketing at either company. Perhaps someone who reads and writes Thai can verify this? - Takeaway (talk) 16:51, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I found only mentions by personal accounts via Google. One is a comment in this article, where the poster mentioned that they remembered Ms Thanom (ถนอม, surname not given), who was their neighbour, growing the chillies in her backyard around 1963. The other is this personal blog post, where the poster tells of learning from elder relatives that his great-great-grandfather, whose name is given as กิมซัว ทิมกระจ่าง (RTGS: Kimsua Thimkrachang, but it's the given name is actually Chinese, so RTGS might not be accurate here), was the originator of the chilli sauce, and that two branches of the family later produced different brands of the sauce. One was ภูเขาทอง (Grand Mountain, not to be confused with the Golden Mount brand which now owns Sriraja Panich). The other, made by Ms Thanom, was Sriraja Panich. The blog author gives her name as ถนอม ทิมกระจ่าง, but also mentions that one of Kimsua's daughters was married off to ขุนจักกะพากพานิชกิจ (Khun Chakkaphakphanitchakit, a noble title), who was the ancestor of the จักกะพาก (Chakkaphak) family. So it's quite possible that ถนอม จักกะพาก would be her name.
Searching further, it appears ถนอม จักกะพาก is mentioned in this thesis by a Chiang Mai University student. It's a passing mention that mentions a potential in-depth source: Ms Thanom was featured in the 27 June 1965 (2:52) issue of สารประชาชน, a magazine published by the government at the time. Finding an original copy of the article would be tricky (even Thammasat University's Pridi Banomyong Library is missing that volume[1]), but I think this is enough for confirmation of her name.
On a different note, this is a Sriraja Panich advertisement featuring historian Paothong Thongchua, who claims that the sauce was an invention of his (unnamed) maternal grandfather. So if all accounts are accurate, he's at least a distant relative of Ms Thanom. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:49, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
PS The Grand Mountain brand, which according to the above blog author is closer to the common original, is now manufactured by Bangkok Sauce Ltd. Part. It appears to be much more low-profile than Sriraja Panich nowadays. The bottles look like this. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:04, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! Great research Paul_012! Is it mentioned anywhere if Siracha sauce already existed before the Sriraja Panich and Grand Mountain brands were established? - Takeaway (talk) 16:16, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's implied in the blog post that there were a good few years between Kimsua first making the sauce, it becoming a small family business, and the creation of those brands. If I have time I might try to hunt down that magazine article; it should be enough of an
WP:RS to base the article on. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:52, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply
]

imitator

http://countrystore.tabasco.com/TABASCO-Sriracha-Sauce/productinfo/03829/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.176.108.8 (talk) 07:34, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Sriracha" - Documentary by Griffin Hammond

The "Sirarcha" Documentary by Griffin Hammond was released February 26, 2014. The film discusses all of the origins of the sauce, as well as modern uses of the sauce. It answers many questions such as 'why isn't the sauce trademarked?' and 'who originally created the sauce?'. The youtube video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXOAx58LBDo discusses the some of the main points of the documentary. According to the Documentary, many of the ideas discussed on this page are inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Firebolt391d (talk • contribs) 02:44, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article's references, much of the film is inaccurate. Seligne (talk) 14:37, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Si vs Sri

I'm not sure how to add this, but I think people would appreciate this explanation of si vs. sri: "The ‘Sri’ in Sri Racha comes from the Sanskrit word ‘Sree’ which means ‘holy’. In Thailand, it is pronounced as ‘si’ but still written as ‘Sri’. In Thai, it is common to write all loan words as they were originally pronounced." [1] While on the topic of translation, Google says Racha means 'rake' in Thai. [2] Marcusreese (talk) 15:25, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Google Translate only works with Thai script when translating Thai (and even then it doesn't do a very good job). Racha here corresponds to rājā. I'm not sure if discussion of the name's meaning necessary in this article. Probably in the one about the town. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:50, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.hope-rehab-center-thailand.com/location/sriracha/
  2. ^ https://translate.google.com/?safe=active&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS694US694&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&client=tw-ob#th/en/racha

"Sriracha" should be lower-case in this article

This article is about a generic sauce called "sriracha", and as such the word should not be capitalized, unless it is part of a proper noun (brand name). But, before making dozens of edits, I wanted to check here.

Any objections to changing "Sriracha" to "sriracha", except when part of a brand name? -- Dan Griscom (talk) 12:41, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalisation of such place-based names seem to vary. Parmesan is usually capitalised, but champagne never is. Merriam-Webster and Lexico are the only Onelook-listed dictionaries to actually include the word sriracha; both have it uncapitalised. So I guess the proposed change is probably fine. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:35, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the OED Third Edition (June 2012 addition) also has it uncapitalised. Dbfirs 17:55, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Changes made; please check to make sure I didn't change any that shouldn't be changed (brand names, quotes, etc.). -- Dan Griscom (talk) 18:21, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Main picture

For non-Southeast Asian readers, feel like it's too easy to confuse the popular American sauce for being the entire class of the sauce. I know there's multiple things done already to emphasize that it's a general category, but I think the picture being of the American brand isn't helping, especially considering the picture on the American brand's article is the same. Feel like we should use a picture of another brand. Pictures draw the eye; feel like the picture being different would go a long way.

talk) 01:24, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
]

I've just removed the infobox, which was inappropriate for this article. That leaves the two-image comparison at the top. If someone could take a photo of a variety of brands on a supermarket shelf (that avoids showing too much of the packaging to be a copyright concern), that would probably be ideal. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sriracha&oldid=1213492866"