Misplaced Pages

Talk:Pálinka

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tüzes fal (talk | contribs) at 08:52, 31 March 2011. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 08:52, 31 March 2011 by Tüzes fal (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconFood and drink Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Food and Drink task list:
To edit this page, select here

 Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:
Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconHungary Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Hungary, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hungary on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HungaryWikipedia:WikiProject HungaryTemplate:WikiProject HungaryHungary
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconEastern Europe (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Eastern Europe, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Eastern EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject Eastern EuropeTemplate:WikiProject Eastern EuropeEastern Europe
WikiProject iconSpirits
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirits, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spirits or Distilled beverages on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpiritsWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritsTemplate:WikiProject SpiritsSpirits
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Spirits WikiProject task list:

This list is transcluded from the tasks page, to edit it click here.


Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Spirits:
  • Tagging all articles that fall under our scope with {{WikiProject Spirits}} and assessing their quality and importance to the project.
Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2


Pronunciation

Barack (pronounced "baratsk") Shouldn’t this be borotsk or something similar? Proper IPA would be better, of course, and the pronunciation hint should probably also be moved to the intro sentence. —ThorstenNY (talk) 02:59, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. NW (Talk) 15:32, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


Palinka → Pálinka — Relisted Vegaswikian (talk) 22:39, 19 January 2011 (UTC) This is a Hungarian short drink, a Hungaricum, The name is protected by EU. See: Palinka with PDO Fakirbakir (talk) 17:46, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

  • Support. The diacritic does absolutely no harm, and under WP:IAR should simply be adopted. This move might even be a step towards making this a general guideline on diacritics, thus simplifying several other guidelines and avoiding many time-wasting controversies. Andrewa (talk) 21:02, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose unless evidence is given that the accent is used in English preferentially over the unaccented form. Legal documents do not make common usage. 65.93.14.29 (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, but I can not understand what you all try to explain here. For instance, I should alter the name of Whisky or Whiskey to 'Viszki' (Hungarian grammar) in the Hungarian Misplaced Pages if I have to use English grammar for the Pálinka in this case. It is a Hungaricum, It is Hungarian drink, not English, British etc.. Fakirbakir (talk) 18:14, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
You should do what Hungarian speakers do. If they call it "Whisky", call your article "Whisky". If they call it "Viszki", call it "Viszki". By your logic, you should change the Hungarian Misplaced Pages' entry for Pezsgő to Champagne to comport with French convention, since by law Champagne is a drink only from France. While you're at it, you might change Skót whisky to Scotch whisky, Konyak to Cognac, Vermut to Vermouth. Erudy (talk) 04:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Expansion of article to include Austrian Palinka and Romanian Palinca

NOTE: This discussion began at Talk:Palinca. But because it concerns expansion of this Palinka article, it was copied here on this date. See Talk:Palinca history for attribution. — CactusWriter 05:45, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I want to inform everyone that "palinca" is a romanian brand for fruit brandy. Even though there are similarities with the hungarian brand "Palinka", it's not the same. EU regulations have approved for each country who's in European Union a specific list of names for traditional alchool drinks. You can check more details here: http://www.festivalulpalincii.ro/files/tiny_mce/File/r_110_208_en.pdf. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali.sweet (talk • contribs) 18:49, 25 March 2011

I think it is ok to treat the Hungarian and Romanian versions in the same article. So, the redirect is ok, but some explanation should be added to the article explaining the difference between the names. 75.57.242.120 (talk) 21:47, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Yes. Agreed. I think the introductory sentence should clarify the 2008 EU which limited the use of the name to the Hungarian version, but that the historical product is considered traditional in both Hungary (Palinka) and Romania (Palinca). We just need some proper references for that. — CactusWriter 21:54, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry for being so defensive, but I actually didn't had time to read all the rules as there are so many...I didn't thought that I will cause any trouble by just deleting the redirect on the page Palinca. I really want to solve this problem the right way. I've been doing some research on this matter and I can share with you other links about the differecences between these 2 brands. :::Here you can see other links: http://www.slovensko.com/news/106 http://courses.cit.cornell.edu/his452/Andrei/ContestedFoodinPostnationalist%20Europe/ContestedCuisine.html - at the bottom of this page you can find even more relevant links regarding this problem http://www.romania-insider.com/romanian-firm-plans-to-export-30000-bottles-of-palinca-to-us/16468/ - If you read this article you can have an idea why is it so bad to use the brand "palinca" as being hungarian and not romanian. People can jump to the conclusion that they are buying something else, when they really want to buy romanian "palinca" and Romania can loose a lot of money that could come from exports of "palinca".
And since UE agreed to treat these brands different for each country by giving limit use of the name "palinca" to Romania and limited use of the name "palinka" to Hungary (please see the list of protected spirits for each country in UE: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOIndex.do?year=2008&serie=L&textfield2=39&Submit=Search&_submit=Search&ihmlang=en - the latest version of the law-2008), I was thinking to contribute in creating a page for the romanian brand "Palinca" with relevant links related to this brand, so that there will be no confusions about this. What do you think?
P.s: I've erased the sentence that was not proper to be used.Hope it's ok like this.Ali.sweet (talk) 09:59, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
I am not yet convinced that it requires a separate article. And think the main article should simply be expanded to include Hungarian, Austrian and Romanian types. From what I have read, there isn't a great difference between the Hungarian/Austrian Palinka and Romanian Palinca -- other than the spelling and modern branding rights from the EU. It seems these are essentially the same product because of their historical and geographical overlap. Misplaced Pages takes no sides in political or economic battles -- our readers are best helped when a single article can provide them with all the basic relevant information. I have initiated the article expansion by changing the introduction to include both the Romanian and Hungarian terms. I think the history section should next be rewritten to be inclusive of the entire historical region, rather than so specific to modern Hungary. The EU section rewritten to include the 2008 determination for each country. Then separate sections provided for Hungary, Romania and Austria which can address any specific regionalism. — CactusWriter 19:03, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I would like to add a few things regarding „Palinca” and „Palinka” differences that can be clearly seen bellow:

I will refer now only to the sections included in the hungarian „Palinka” page on Misplaced Pages: I agree - EU legal definition section should be changed completely. Since 2002, UE has issued new laws, as there where many conflicts regarding the rights to use „Palinka” only by hungarians., so that all the countries are protected by EU regulations. The history section should include, as you’ve already mentioned, impartial points of view. All of the three countries involved claim to be the founders of this specific product, so it shouln’t be accepted only hungarian point of view. When you refer to separate sections provided for Hungary, Romania and Austria which can address any specific regionalism do you refer in changing every section on the page or just adding new ones? Because, there are differences between these brands. For example: Types of „Palinka” – this section only describes the hungarian types - In Romania, there are 21 types of „Palinca”, governed by Order no. 147 from 08.03.2005 issued by by Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development (http://www.mapam.ro/pages/legislatie.php?offset=147&limit=20) that approves protected and recognized geographical names for spirit drinks in Romania. 1. Pălinca de Bihor 2. Rieni Palinca de Bihor 3. Pălinca de Zalau 4. Pălinca de Ardeal 5. Pălinca de Maramures 6. Pălinca Carpatii Apuseni 7. Pălinca Transilvania 8. Pălinca Româneasca “Tricolor” 9. Pălinca de Brad 10. Pălinca de Banovita 11. Pălinca de Câlnau 12. Pălinca Crai Nou 13. Pălinca de Valea Vinului 14. Pălinca de Mediesu Aurit 15. Pălinca de Camârzan 16. Pălinca de Oas 17. Pălinca de Cluj 18. Pălinca de Focsani 19. Pălinca de Dragosloveni 20. Pălinca de Vrancea 21. Pălinca de Jari tea „Variaties” section only speaks about hungarian variaties. Romania also has many variaties of palinca as you may see at the types of products section above. Also: Commercial production: As you may see below, the production of hungarian „Palinka” and romanian „Palinca” is different. See: Regulations on the definition, description, presentation and labeling traditional Romanian spirit drinks stated in Order nr. 368 from 13.06.2008 issued by Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development, Ministry of Public Health and chairman of the National Authority for Consumer Protection (http://www.madr.ro/pages/industrie_alimentara/ordin-368-din-13-iunie-2010.pdf), regarding „palinca”:

  • A) fermentation of the fruit is done in wooden vats or tanks or in fermentation vessels made of stainless steel, depending on the area where the fruit were produced, of varieties and the specific technology applied;
  • B) distillation process is made in copper boilers with direct combustion or in distillation plants at an alcoholic strength that does not exceed 70% vol so that the distillated product has an aroma and taste derived from the fruit or fruits; redistillation at same alcoholic strength is authorized;
  • C) having a volatile content greater than or equal to 200 grams per hectolitre of 100% vol
  • D) having a hydrocyanic acid content, if palinca product is made of fruits stone fruits, not more than 7 grams per alchool hectolitre of 100% vol
  • E) having a maximum methyl alcohol content of 1.000 grams per hectolitre of 100% vol for the following fruit: plum (Prunus domestica L.), mirabelle (Prunus domestica L. subsp. Syriaca-Borkh., Janch . Ex. Mansf.) brumării plum (Prunus domestica L.), apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) pear (Pyrus communis L.), with the exception of Williams pears (Pyrus communis L. cv 'Williams'), raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.), blackberry (Rubus fruticosus auct. AGGR.) apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.) and peach , methyl alcohol content not exceeding 1.200 grams per hectolitre of 100% vol for the following fruit: Williams pear (Pyrus communis L. cv 'Williams'), red currant (Ribes rubrum L.), black currant (Ribes nigrum L.), rowan berry (Sorbus aucuparia L.), elder (Sambucus nigra L.), quince (Cydonia oblonga Mill.) and juniper berries (Juniperus communis L. and / or Juniperus oxicedrus L.), methyl alcohol content not exceeding 1.350 grams per hectolitre of 100% vol
  • F) use in the manufacture of palinca products of sweetening products is not permitted;
  • G) use in the manufacture palinca caramelized sugar is not allowed not even with the purpose to adapt the color, yellow or golden yellow color being obtained by aging in oak barrels;
  • H) use in the manufacture of palinca of flavoring substances, flavoring preparations , colorants, ethyl alcohol of agricultural origin or a distillate of agricultural origin is not permitted;
  • I) combining (blending) is permitted;
  • J) The minimum alcoholic strength is 40% vol marketed for consumption;
  • K) storage, preservation and product obsolescence takes place in wooden vessels, stainless steel or glass.

Last, but not least, the introduction phrase has been again modified in the sense of excluding the romanian „Palinca”...So I think it should be changed again. Please make sure that all of the things described above will be included on the page „Palinka” and not deleted after being added as the introductory sentence was...P.S: thank you for being impartial and for trying to solve this problem in the best way possible...89.132.134.35 (talk) 17:49, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for providing that reference. It shows there doesn't appear to be significant difference between the Romanian and Hungarian products. According to EU regulations for fruit spirit, your points C) D) E) H) are the same for both Palinka and Palinca. A comparison of Hungarian regulations with your list shows that points A) B) F) G) I) and J) are also the same for both. It appears that the only regulatory difference is Hungary uses the EU stipulation for "fruit spirit" of a minimum 37.5% alcoholic content, whereas Romania sets the minimum for Palinca at 40%. I suggest adding three separate sections for Austria, Hungary and Romania which will include the information about regional variations and geographic types. — CactusWriter 05:52, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello again. You are right about the production process. I didn't know there is almost the same procedure to obtain palinca, but it's good that EU stated regulations for all types of palinca/palinka produced in Romania and Hungary/Austria, so that the quality is higher. I only saw what it was written on the article (see: section EU legal definition: "The production of palinka in the European Union is regulated by order 1-3-1576/89, which took effect on 1 July 2002. According to the regulation, an alcoholic beverage may be called palinka in the EU only if: 1. it is made 100-percent from fruits or herbs indigenous to the Carpathian Basin and grown in Hungary, or from pomace grown in Hungary, and does not contain any additives,2. it is produced and bottled in Hungary, 3. its alcohol content is between 37.5% and 86% ABV." and since the article I provided says something different I thought there are big differences. But this proves once again that the article written about "Palinka" should be completely modify. It's clearly impartial and the quotations are really old and not true at this moment. It's true that in 2004 EU granted Hungary exclusive rights on the name "palinka" but this was only for a short while, as UE didn't take into account that Romania and Austria are also producing a similar type of "palinka" and granted afterwards rights also to Romania and Austria.

So, yes, there should be 3 different sections for each country, where there can be added information about specific traditions, products and consumption for each of these countries. So who will make these changes? I could provide relevant articles related to "Palinca" made in Romania.What about Austria? And who will make the appropiate changes for Hungary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.132.134.35 (talk) 18:21, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Any editor is welcome to make edits to the article -- provided, of course, that they adhere to Misplaced Pages policies on neutral point-of-view and reliable sources. I'll try and rearrange the article and make the subsections in the next few days. First I would like to read good sources for the history section which provide an overview of historical Palinka/Palinca distillation for the entire Carpathian region. If you know of any, please add them. — CactusWriter 17:09, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Palinka is a traditional Hungarian drink for many centuries. The fact that a similar sounding name was recently introduced to confuse customers does not mean that it's a foreign language translation or anything like that. It's just a similar sounding name such as ADIDAS is a real brand and ADIDIDAS is not a translation but a name chosen for purpose of deception. The recent trademark issues have nothing to do with this traditional drink. It's like saying Vine instead of Wine for marketing purposes, it is irrelevant to the main point of the article. This is not a promotional article nor is it the job of wikipedia to engage in advertising or promotion. Tüzes fal (talk) 08:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Categories: