This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Food and drink Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. 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 Mid This 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: Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish Participate in project-related deletion discussions. Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this. Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here. Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages. Hungary Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hungary, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hungary on Wikipedia. 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 12:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

who is this Agnes Heringer? some usenet user who posted a recipe somewhere??? how can this be a viable source?? I'm removing it --90.213.59.157 (talk) 17:49, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. You got a point there. Changed to June Meyers recipe, valid link

Warrington (talk) 22:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Xx236 (talk) 06:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be nice to have more pictures. E.g. about the rice variant, with scrambled eggs and as a sauce for a fried meat.

And the current opening picture is with bell paprika, which is a substitute, not an authentic ingredient, even if it tastes good. That should be replaced, as rather misleading. Gerbolya (talk) 12:52, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it could be a much better opening picture: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hungarian_Lecs%C3%B3_(7837303170).jpg Gerbolya (talk) 12:59, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I try to prove here that the paprika variety is key for a lecso. Using bell paprika is completely wrong.

First of all, the bell paprika was practically unknown in Hungary till the early 1990s.

If you read Hungarian cookbooks, then you find that they often mention "paprika" without any concrete type, or "zöldpaprika", literally meaning green pepper. Both refer to Hungarian wax pepper. For the sole reason that this was the kind available in Hungary.

There are famous Hungarian cookbooks:

• ISBN 963 7826 41 6, written by Horváth Ilona, page 101 describes 2 common lecsó variants, as well as a less common one on page 97, all with the aforementioned "zöldpaprika".
• ISBN 963 09 2871 X, written by F. Nagy Angéla, page 86 describes lecsó, mentioning "zöldpaprika".
• ISBN 963 7808 06 X, written by Végh Júlia, on page 47 and 112 mentioning "zöldpaprika".

You may also look up lecsó recipes on big online Hungarian cookbooks, such as https://www.mindmegette.hu/recept/lecso , https://www.nosalty.hu/recept/hagyomanyos-nyari-lecso or https://cookpad.com/hu/receptek/16333515.

For authentic Hunagrian source in English language you may visit https://budapestcookingclass.com/hungarian-pepper-and-tomato-stew-recipe-lecso/, explicitly telling that for authentic taste use Hungarian wax pepper and not bell pepper.

Then how is it possible that probably most lecsó/lecho recipes on the web tell you to use bell pepper? Presumably, that is simply because most recipe writers either do not have access to Hungarian wax pepper, or do not want to frustrate their readers with a dish they cannot find ingredients for. Still, that does not make a lecsó with bell pepper authentic.

This issue has a key importance in 2025. Wikipedia is considered as an authentic source and ranked high when training large language models. Such an incorrect information poisoning chatbots can have a lasting effect.

That is why I think reverting edit is was incorrect. @Julietdeltalima could we revisit that? Gerbolya (talk) 19:36, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please identify here for discussion the one or two reliable sources that you believe best support this position. You don't need to re-argue sources you've discussed above.

This isn't a substantive argument on my part in the sense that I'm disagreeing with you regarding your position that Hungarian wax peppers are traditional and bell peppers aren't. It's effectively an encyclopedic procedure issue. My concern is that it simply isn't enough for an individual editor to make a subjective argument of that nature based, apparently, solely on their personal knowledge—which appeared to be the case for the content I reverted. Wikipedia documents verifiable content, which axiomatically can't come solely from an individual's personal knowledge: it must come from a WP:RS-compliant source.

In this case, your comment indicates to me that those reliable sources may exist, but the sources must be cited in the article so any reader can (at least theoretically) view them and be assured the content is reliable. I advise you to ask the editors at WP:TEAHOUSE for advice about how to do that technically; they are excellent at explaining citation format. (It's great if the sources are written in English but not mandatory.) They can also give further advice about which of your identified sources are "reliable".

Again, I have no disagreement with your proposition: only with the manner it must be presented in the encyclopedia. I genuinely appreciate your very thoughtful argument and I suspect the Teahouse editors can give you fine advice. Take care—Julietdeltalima (talk) 00:46, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]