Talk:Ghorayeba

Vanillekipferl

I have reverted these edits by an IP editor from New Zealand: , due to several problems. The main problem is that no reliable source was cited for the information. Linking to another Wikipedia article is not sufficient, though in any case, the linked article doesn't offer any mention of or citations supporting the claim that Vanillekipferl is the same thing as Qurabiya. Also, the information was added in a way that makes it appear to be supported by existing sources (Davidson, Marks), but it is not - see WP:HIJACK. Much of the added text appears to be original research or reflections based on personal knowledge or analysis. Furthermore, there are issues with instructional or presumptuous language such as it is worthwhile considering that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. - see MOS:NOTED, with capitalization of section headers, and various other things. --IamNotU (talk) 23:43, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I agree that there are issues with the language and sourcing. Spudlace (talk) 00:10, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

I have found, on Wikipedia, that vanillekipferl cookies are Australian, German, Swiss, Czech, Slovak, and Hungarian small, crescent-shaped biscuits. The only correlation between these two cookies, as found in many sources, like www.daringgourmet.com, Kourabiedes used to be shaped into crescents, just like vanillekipferl cookies used to be, because of the Ottoman influence. Wiki-wiki-waka-waka-1249 (talk) 02:40, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Why "qurabiya"?

Why is the title of the article spelt with a "q" and not "gh"? The Arabic letter that begins the word, "غ" (ghayn) is never Romanised to a "q", and the vast majority of mentions of the word in the article begin "gh". Would it not make more sense to change the title of the article to either "ghurabiya" or a Romanisation of the "neutral" MSA word? 5.186.121.223 (talk) 10:43, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

It appears this might be how it's called in Persian, in which case it would be helpful if this is clarified. Turnopoems (talk) 11:18, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Ghoriba is the common name. I suggest starting a move request. M.Bitton (talk) 12:52, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

April 2025

@Jiniperus: please explain why you think that your edit is an improvement and seek consensus for it. M.Bitton (talk) 16:56, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

The infobox singgled out a country that isnt once mentioned in the article. I haven't seen that in any other articles. I read Wikipedia more than I edit and maybe I am misinformed. I simply did not think anyone would mind if it was changed to a generic photo that fit the article content. Jiniperus (talk) 17:04, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. The fact that Serbia is not mentioned in the article is indeed problematic. As for the other concern that you raised (regarding singling out a country), I don't see how that's avoidable.

Is there a particular image that you think is more appropriate (as in one that doesn’t mention the country of origin)? M.Bitton (talk) 17:16, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

This was the only one I could find that does not mention country of origin

Jiniperus (talk) 18:04, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

That's a random cookie. In case you missed what I wrote below (I edited the image's caption). M.Bitton (talk) 18:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I edited the image's caption. M.Bitton (talk) 18:04, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Requested move 20 January 2026

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Ghorayeba. There is clear consensus that the current title is not appropriate and that the article should be moved, albeit with less agreement over whether a Turkish- or Arabic-derived title should be chosen. Accordingly, this is a WP:NOGOODOPTIONS situation requiring an assessment of the available alternatives. While some support was expressed for the Turkish form Kurabiye, subsequent discussion raised concerns that its apparent prevalence is largely driven by Turkish-language sources rather than independent English-language scholarship. By contrast, English-language reference works and established culinary sources demonstrate usage of Arabic-derived forms. This indicates a rough consensus that an Arabic-derived English form is preferable under WP:COMMONNAME. Among the spellings discussed, Ghorayeba attracted explicit support, is attested in reliable English-language sources, and drew no sustained policy-based opposition. Accordingly, the page is moved to Ghorayeba.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:35, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

---

Qurabiya → KurabiyeKurabiye – Move to the best candidate for common name, by virtue of uniform transliteration from Turkish, versus the scattered Arabic-derived versions, and the all but non-existent usage of prior title, see Ngrams. The Turkish-derived name is also the only one with its own Wiktionary page. Iskandar323 (talk) 13:23, 20 January 2026 (UTC) — Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:27, 27 January 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 09:58, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

As nom, I have changed my support vote below away from the proposed above. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:51, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Comment: I want to mention that there was a discussion about this already here Talk:Qurabiya#Why_"qurabiya"?.

Leaning towards move: Because of Google search data, as well as the fact that qurabiya does not seem like a common romanization of any words besides the Ottoman Turkish قرابيه, so I am in the favor of moving from qurabiya to anything else. 2kbfloppadisk (talk) 18:28, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Support - The present title appears to be a transliteration of the Farsi, but this topic doesn't seem to have an especially strong tie to Iran over Turkey, Greece, or the Arabic-speaking world. Based on the Ngrams, the most common names are, in order, kourabiedes (Greek), kurabiye (Turkish), ghraybeh (Arabic), ghoriba (Arabic). However, this topic seems to have a stronger historic connection to Turkey than Greece and the Greek name is itself a loan from Turkish, so I favour moving to the Turkish title and keeping the Greek title as a redirect to the section it was merged into. – Scyrme (talk) 19:09, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

For clarity, I'm happy to move to one of the Arabic titles proposed in this discussion if other editors conclude that it's more often used than the Turkish title. – Scyrme (talk) 19:34, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

Oppose if anything, it should be moved to Ghurayba (a name that actually means something, i.e., little wonders). The topic has a stronger historic connection to the Arab world, with the oldest attested recipe going back to the 10th century. While the Arabic word has been transliterated into Turkish and then into Greek (see The Oxford Companion to Sugar and Sweets entry for more details), it still in use in various forms (more or less similar sounding) in the Arab world. M.Bitton (talk) 19:54, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Why not say support move to Ghurayba then? Either way, the article shouldn't stay at the present title. – Scyrme (talk) 20:35, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

I do support the move to ghorayeba or Ghurayba. M.Bitton (talk) 20:54, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't mind supporting an Arabic transliteration, but I've struggled to find a prevalent enough one. The versions are all so scattered about and none seem to have predominant usage. "Ghurayba" is a good example – you see it online on recipe pages, but on Google Scholar it just turns up as a surname. At the same time, a caveat to the existing proposition is that when you put "Kurabiye" into Google Scholar, a lot of Turkish language sources pop up, and Scholar doesn't appear to be able to filter them out. So it's possible that Turkish is being overrepresented here. I now also wonder ... does Ngrams perhaps have the same filtering flaw. Perhaps Turkish papers just do very good SEO in English for reach. Anyway, if there is a transliterated Arabic form that someone can demonstrate has widespread usage, I will support it. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:07, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Oh yes, I'm definitely seeing a problem with "kurabiye" drawing out purely Turkish language sources – now in Google books too. Ghurayba and Ghuraiba both at least coax out a couple of English language cook books. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:13, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

The Oxford Companion to Food form of "Ghorayebah" does actually have significant traction both online in general and in Google Books. There is similar prevalence if you just drop the silent "h" for the simplified version. Together, these get the most relevant English language book hits of any version I've tried (and that's not even counting wider online prevalence), so I actually support ghorayebah or ghorayeba now — think I'm agnostic on the final "h". It's odd that the one precise spelling in the Oxford companion wasn't in the alt names (in favour of numerous far more obscure versions) and doesn't have a redirect, but that may be part of the problem of why it's been flying under the radar. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:50, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

With the "h": New Book of Middle Eastern Food by Claudia Roden. P.441.; The Mediterranean Dish by Suzy Karadsheh. P.273.; The Cookie Party Cookbook by Robin Olson. P.188.; Egyptian Cookbook by Brad Hoskinson. P.66. And so on and so forth. Lots of usage. Iskandar323 (talk) 05:06, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Support - "Kurabiye" is used more in the references. Guz13 (talk) 00:45, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

• Relisting comment - I closed this as moved earlier today, and consensus seems fairly clear, with four supports and only one oppose, with the oppose rationale rebutted. However, since relists are cheap, and M.Bitton has requested a relist on my talk page, I am happy to grant this. I don't particularly expect the situation to change, but we shall see! Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 19:27, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for that. There seems to be a bit of a misunderstanding as nobody is opposing a move to another name and there are no "four" editors agreeing on a particular name:

  • 2kbfloppadisk supports a move to any other name.
  • I support a move to an Arabic name (ghorayeba, Ghurayba, etc).
  • Iskandar323 supports a move to an Arabic name (ghorayeba).
  • Guz13 supports a move to the Turkish name (Kurabiye) while thinking that it's used in more sources, when in fact, those sources are Turkish language sources.
  • Scyrme is open to the idea of supporting an Arabic name now that it's clear that the ngram results are misleading and the subject has a stronger connection with the Arab world.

  M.Bitton (talk) 00:28, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

  I will be more explicit about what I personally support:

  • I support the move to kurabiye, because its the most consistent.
  • If we are to move to an Arabic romanization, I support ghraybeh (from Levantine Arabic) over ghoraybeh for the following reasons:
    • It's the same as ghoraybeh but with the 'o' omitted (an edit distance of 1), which is favorable for SEO. For instance, when I look up ghoraybeh, Google suggest ghraybeh: https://www.google.com/search?q=ghoraybeh
    • It's a shorter name.
    • This could be irrelevant, because this is English Wikipedia, but its common in several Arabic dialects to drop vowels, often the first short vowel falls victim. E.g. Hijazi -> Hjazi
    • Ghrayba, without the Imāla, is uncommon in the sources, so that is less variance within the same cluster.
    • It's used in many sources, Levantine cuisine is generally very well documented in English.

  2kbfloppadisk (talk) 09:21, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

  I don't know what you mean by "consistent". As far as I can tell, kurabiye is consistently used in Turkish language sources, while English scholarly sources, such as The Oxford Companion to Sugar and Sweets, use the Arabic name (Ghurayba or ghorayeba). M.Bitton (talk) 13:10, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

  How do we decide to use either the Turkish sources in English or the Arabic sources in English? Guz13 (talk) 19:56, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

  We don't have to use either: we should use the English reliable sources (ideally, the scholarly ones). M.Bitton (talk) 20:00, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

  Please allow me to reiterate: By "consistent", I mean consistently spelled, for instance, I don't see "kurabiya" or "kurabiyeh" being used often, in other words, kurabiye does not have any "neighbours". 2kbfloppadisk (talk) 21:27, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

  Unlike the transliteration of the Arabic word, that's the Turkish spelling (as used in Turkish sources). M.Bitton (talk) 21:30, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 01:53, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

  The nominator changed their mind (they support the Arabic name). M.Bitton (talk) 01:57, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting as there seems support for a move; however, it seems the destination could use further discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 09:58, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Greece, WikiProject Food and drink, WikiProject Armenia, WikiProject Cyprus, WikiProject Saudi Arabia, WikiProject Arab world, WikiProject Tunisia, WikiProject Africa, WikiProject Algeria, WikiProject Kuwait, WikiProject Croatia, WikiProject Iran, WikiProject Albania, WikiProject Libya, WikiProject Bulgaria, WikiProject Morocco, WikiProject Serbia, WikiProject Turkey, and WikiProject Bosnia and Herzegovina have been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 10:03, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

• Support move (but to the most common English-language form) Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:AT, the title should reflect the name most commonly used in reliable English-language sources, not internal consistency of transliteration, SEO considerations, or usage in non-English sources. While "Kurabiye" is the Turkish spelling and appears frequently in Turkish-language material, much of its apparent dominance in search results seems to be driven by Turkish sources rather than independent English-language scholarship. English-language reference works and established culinary authors (e.g., The Oxford Companion to Sugar and Sweets; works by Claudia Roden and others) use Arabic-derived forms such as "Ghorayeba", "Ghorayebah", or "Ghurayba". These appear in independent English publications and therefore carry greater weight under WP:COMMONNAME. Given that the dish has documented historical roots in the Arab world and that Arabic-derived transliterations are well attested in English reference literature, it seems more consistent with policy to move the article to the most established Arabic-derived English form rather than the Turkish endonym. If consensus forms around a specific spelling (e.g., ghorayeba / ghorayebah / ghurayba), I would support that outcome. — Боки 💬 📝 15:56, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

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.