Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/Archive 19

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

→

Archive 25

Food and drink Project‑class

This page 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 articles Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Food and Drink task list: edit history watch purge 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.

This is an archive of discussions from the second half of 2011

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Philippine cuisine#Philippine cuisine in the United States. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 16:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})

I'll go peek at the discussion but I have to say this is one of the most awesome usernames I have ever seen anywhere. → ROUX ₪ 16:53, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

hello i am trying to find information about thistle use in cheese making. i know it has an enzyme similar to that in a calf stomach which coagulates the milk. what id like to know is when to harvest, where on the plant it is produced, how much is needed to curdle an amount of milk, what teperature at which the enzyme is activated, how long it takes to transform the milk. if anyone is good at searching the internet they might be able to get rare information which i cant find. i would also say that i found out it is used in a portuguese cheese where they use the cardoon thistle {a relative of artichoke} and common tistle is mentioned in homers writing.this is all i could find out. there seems to be research into using it as a commercial rennet but i cant find any of the research i really dont know where to start looking so i have only got what google has given me. thank you and i hope somone out there has some leads, sites that may be usefull to search or just a grandad who used to do it. Horace the cheese (talk) 12:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

The baking soda page "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baking_powder" does not make mention of the connection between Vincent Price and baking soda. This connection is mentioned in the article on Vincent Price "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincent_Price". It states there: "His grandfather, Vincent Clarence Price, invented "Dr. Price's Baking Powder," the first cream of tartar baking powder, and secured the family's fortune." and has a reference for that factoid.

This connection has been the subject of a question on the 7/2/11 NPR broadcast of "Wait! Wait! Don't Tell Me". My wife heard that today on Chicago station WBEZ and brought it to my attention. I've never edited a wiki page, but it seems to me that this would be an interesting connection to point out in the main article on baking powder--especially since it has been mentioned on NPR. alanw (talk) 02:49, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

I've just joined this WikiProject and I have joined the assessment task force. I think we need a few more people working on this because there is a huge backlog. Maybe it should be on top of the to do list? Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 15:32, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

If you would like to do so, go ahead and do so. I have done allot of assessment work, including tagging all articles with the template and stub sorting. It is good to see you taking an interest in helping us sort the articles associated with WP:Food. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 18:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I am the Wikipedia Outreach Ambassador to ARKive, who have kindly agreed to donate an initial 200 article texts about endangered species from their project, to Wikipedia, under a CC-BY-SA license. Details are on the GLAM/ARKive project page. The donated texts include edible animals and plants, with fungi to follow. Your help, to merge the donated texts into articles, would be appreciated. Guidelines for doing so are also on the above page. Once articles have been expanded using the donated texts, we are also seeking assistance in having those articles translated into other languages. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns, on the project's talk page, or my own. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:16, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I have been informed that I should seek permission to add your banner to articles. So should Cherry Ripe (candy bar) be bannered with your WikiProject? This is an Australian chocolate bar. 65.94.77.96 (talk) 06:02, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Seek permission? Hell no, anybody can banner it, you just need to seek someone to assess it, and it looks like it has been done. Looks like a tasty candy bar! Boneyard90 (talk) 13:15, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

If someone has joined the project, there should be a welcome template maybe? I have created one if it helps, please say your input and decide whether is should be used or not or any improvements or suggestions related to it.

Here it is:

Thank you. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 17:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

That is great! Good work! Let me talk to some one about creating a template with some magic words so this can be made a template. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 22:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I created the template. All you need to do is type: {{subst:FD Welcome}} ~~~~ --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 01:07, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Because I am a lousy cook myself, I admire what others do. So I have described all Irish Michelin starred restaurants and most of the Michelin starred chefs. (I have run in trouble with a few and a request for help is mailed to an expert). Soon to start is a "new project" based on List of Michelin starred restaurants in the Netherlands. I am aware that I have to stay away from templates, so unfortunately nor the Irish restaurants nor the Irish chefs have a navigation template. See User:Night of the Big Wind#"My articles" for the articles written by me. Night of the Big Wind _talk 04:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello my name is Jean Guy Jacques (Potensky) I edited the Hawaiian Punch page... because it's all the wrong info... I was the dirctor of the first commercials produced at John Urie and Associates in Hollywood (1962) The page hasn't been changed yet... why??? also your system is so complicated I have to spend ten minutes in order to find something... and for signing I don't have tildes on my board... ^^^^ that's the closes I can get... can some one please reply... thank you... Potensky Potenski (talk) 08:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me for editing in your contribution, but you can make an internal link to a page by putting the page name between square brackets like this [[Hawaiian Punch]]. Happy editing! Night of the Big Wind _talk 12:28, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

You changes in the article did come up. Unfortunately, you did not mention any third party sources in your contribution to support your claims. Effect was that someone rolled back your contribution. Especially because you are involved in it yourself, it is important to add those third party sources. Otherwise it could be seen as selfpromotion an/or removed as a "conflict of interest". Night of the Big Wind _talk 12:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

The article Crêpe was moved to Crepe in July. There is currently a discussion here to move it back. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 04:19, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

The Gatorade article currently contains some misinformation, as IP editors have added inaccurate information regarding the history of the beverage. I've described these problematic edits in more detail on the article's Talk page: Talk:Gatorade#Misinformation_in_History_section however haven't reached any consensus. I would make the change myself, but I am closely connected to the subject, and wish to fully uphold WP:COI. Would someone here be willing to take a peek at that discussion post, and update the article as you see fit? Cheers, Jeff Bedford (talk) 18:46, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

I have been gradually improving our article on the American lobster, and I've finished most of what I can do. The main outstanding task is to provide references for the food & fisheries section (or rewrite it with references). Can anyone here help? I know very little about cookery & fishing, particularly in the United States, so any assistance would be much appreciated. --Stemonitis (talk) 07:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

May I suggest Wikipedia:WikiProject Fishing and Fisheries? They may be able to help you as well. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you; I tried there a while ago, but I haven't yet heard anything. --Stemonitis (talk) 08:04, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Are they still active? --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 13:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Apparently not. The last talk thread to receive a response was in August 2009. The project page has been updated many times in that time, though, almost exclusively by User:Epipelagic. --Stemonitis (talk) 14:29, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Input would be appreciated at an RfC here about InfoBoxes of food products, particularly whether ingredients should be listed. --Noleander (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

The picture in the article Cheese on toast doesn't look correct. The article states that cheese on toast is "a snack made by placing cheese on slices of toasted bread and melting the cheese under a grill." The problem with the picture is that it doesn't look like this description. The cheese is all over the plate. It looks like cheese was just put over two pieces of bread and put in a microwave like nachos or melted some other way. If the dish was made on the grill, the cheese wouldn't be slopped all over the plate. I don't think this is an accurate depiction of cheese on toast. It looks like it was cooked a different method. Maybe it was cheese on toast and the restaurant likes adding extra cheese after it is grilled. Joe Chill (talk) 02:36, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

This looks more like slices of bread with molten cheese poured over it. It is certainly not even toast what is used here... Night of the Big Wind _talk 15:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

It looks like cheese on toast to me, just made by someone who was messy when s/he dumped the cheese on top. There is nothing about running it under a grill that will make the cheese stay on top of the toast, or that will make cheese you sprinkled all over climb up off the plate and get back on top of the toast.

Based on the grease visible in the full-size image, the cheese was shredded, and I'd guess that it's even the classic cheddar cheese. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Nehi Soda is mentioned numerous times in the movie Paper Moon Starring Ryan & Tatum O'Neal

Nehi soda is mentioned numerous times in the movie Paper Moon, where Ryan O'Neal says to Tatum "Drink your Nehi & eat your Coney Island". He says it quite a few times that I can remember. See the movie if you need a reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.17.85.102 (talk) 02:37, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

That is what is known as trivia, a factoid that is simply something in another medium that does not have anything to do with the subject except in a passing mention. Simply listing unimportant information such as this in an article is discouraged unless there is a valid reason to do so; think of the Coke bottle in The Gods Must Be Crazy or AOL in You've Got Mail where the subject is important to the story. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 04:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I found Crownie (cookie + brownie) during new page patrolling.

• Is this notable?
• Should it redirect to Wiktionary?
• What sources are considered appropriate for food and drink articles?
• Does anyone here want to welcome User:Handy22 on behalf of the Foodies?

--Slashme (talk) 11:10, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

While they look tasty, there is a general rule of thumb for food related articles that a printed recipe does not establish notability. A quick Google search shows very little about this little chunk of tasty Americanism beyond recipes, up to eight pages in. I would say it doesn't meet the standards for inclusion, IMHO. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 12:33, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

I think we should see about figuring out a way to WP:PRESERVE this information by WP:MERGEing it to some suitable page, e.g., Chocolate brownie or Cookie#Classification_of_cookies. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:37, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Good point. I'm going to ask the original author whether he or she is interested in this task. --Slashme (talk) 11:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Can somebody give his/her view on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fergus Moore? According to the nominator a Michelin starred head chef is not notable. I am aware that the article is really thin (and a stub). Night of the Big Wind _talk 20:30, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

How many Michelin starred head chefs are there in the world? Quite a few thousand, judging from the article. Remember that a Wikipedia article isn't an unmitigated blessing to a person. I've gone to add my voice to the deletion discussion. --Slashme (talk) 12:06, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, maybe a few thousand from the first edition of the Michelin Guide to present and worldwide. Out of how many head chefs, other chefs and cooks? You are still looking a an elite, a happy few. And from that happy few I guess 95% just stayed in their kitchen to do what they liked most: cooking. So there will be even less sources (if any) sources available of them, as I found out on four collegues of Fergus Moore. Night of the Big Wind _talk 15:16, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Another interesting question: why does Michelin state the name of the chefs on het page? See: Michelin Online - Ireland or Michelin Online - England. Night of the Big Wind _talk 15:42, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

It's been nominated for deletion twice and both times it was kept due to lack of consensus. The article is entirely based around an anecdote involving Elvis Presley, that's it. It's entertaining, sure, but searching through Google, that's essentially the only notable occurrence of the sandwich aside from random recipe guides. In my opinion it really should be merged somewhere else, either into Elvis' article in shortened form or merged to Peanut butter, banana and bacon sandwich as it's essentially just a larger variation. Any other opinions?--GroovySandwich^Yum. 23:40, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the merge proposal, but not into the Elvis article (except possibly as a very short sentence with a wikilink to the relevant section in the PNB/Ban/Bacon article). --Slashme (talk) 12:09, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Anyone else have a thought on the matter? If anyone opposes, please say so, otherwise I'll go ahead with the merge shortly--GroovySandwich^Yum. 07:01, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Did you place this discussion on the talk:Fool's Gold Loaf page? That would be the proper thing to do before moving forward with the merge. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 15:17, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I looked at the merge proposal, and it was not properly set up. Puffin added the merge tag last month but did not add the template to the other articles notifying other editors about the proposal. Additionally, the discussion was never initiated on the talk page, so I have done that. I suggest you wait the normal 14 days now so that a proper discussion can be had. This will prevent another user from claiming that this was done against consensus. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 15:49, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

I have just created a new category for Wikipedia - Food and Drinks named after places. I have put chorley cake, Dundee cake, Eccles cake and Lancashire hotpot in it, but please have a look at it and let me know whether it can be expanded. Thanks a million, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 14:47, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, thank you to those who have put some more entries there. I see that the article is now at "Categories for deletion". If you go there, you will be able to share your thoughts on the proposed deletion. Many thanks, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 09:16, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Can some one please look at the article on tarts? It desperately needs a clean-up - it does not even clarify how there are different types of tart, such as egg custard tarts, Bakewell tarts and jam tarts. See my comments on the talk page there, and see whether any one in this WikiProject group agrees with them. Many thanks, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:18, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

You can do so if you want. If you feel that the article is lacking, then make the changes you feel need to be made. Just remember to properly cite you work according to the guidelines. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:59, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm new to WP and to this project. I've done a few minor edits but never have volunteered to help with any project before. Please let me know where I can help and I will try. I've been cooking for over 40 years, worked briefly as a short order cook, been a paid journalist, and I love helping. Please let me know what I can do. Thanks! LittleRedWriter (talk) 03:45, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Great to have you! Lets start out first - What is your area of interest? Restaurants, Desserts, Beverages, Cheeses, Herbs and spices or another area? (those are the working groups BTW). Are you a good proof reader? --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:39, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I have no clue what a short order cook is. Maybe you can explain that a bit more clearly in the article Cook (profession). And a thorough check of that article and Chef is also welcome, as it looks to be in your field of expertise. Ow, and welcome aboard! Night of the Big Wind _talk 15:33, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

A short order cook is a type of line cook usually found in diners or family-style restaurants. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 19:48, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Maybe it sounds a bit rude, but I relate it to my own hotel experience. We had there 3 kitchens: 1 for the restaurant, 1 for weddings and parties and one for barfood. Am I correct the the chef of the barfood kitchen is (one form of a) short order chef? Night of the Big Wind _talk 21:47, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

A short order cook cooks foods that can be prepared quickly. For me it meant cooking sandwiches on the grill, prepping salads and adding pre-made soups to the steam table. I also cooked foods in a deep-fat fryer. I'm now just a home cook that's been cooking for over 40 years. LittleRedWriter (talk) 02:40, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I've written about food history and have contributed recipes. I'm a retired journalist and for fun I used to write food articles.LittleRedWriter (talk) 02:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Well if you like, there are articles that need work that can be found in the following categories:

These are stubs, articles that are little more than a quick summary of a subject:

• Category:Stub-Class Food and drink articles
• Category:Stub-Class Foodservice articles
• Category:Stub-Class Desserts articles
• Category:Stub-Class Cheeses articles
• Category:Stub-Class Herbs and Spices articles
• Category:Stub-Class Pubs articles

These are start class, articles that are developing, but which are quite incomplete and may require further reliable sources:

• Category:Start-Class Cheeses articles
• Category:Start-Class Food and drink articles
• Category:Start-Class Foodservice articles
• Category:Start-Class Desserts articles
• Category:Start-Class Herbs and Spices articles
• Category:Start-Class Pubs articles

As you can see, there are allot of articles in this project alone that need work and there are more in the Beer, Wine and Distilled beverage projects. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:21, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Our articles on cooking equipment and basic cooking techniques (like poaching) are also typically in need of some TLC. Category:Cooking stubs shows a list of very short pages about kitchenware and cooking techniques. Many of these contain zero sources, and a basic textbook from a culinary arts class would probably cover most of them. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:58, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Would an article on Cedar plank salmon survive an Afd? What are in general the policies for dishes: I don't see many articles around on dishes, are they disallowed?Divide et Impera (talk) 14:51, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

As with everything on Wikipedia, if you can find enough third-party sources to satisfy WP:GNG then you can most certainly write an article. Having it survive AfD will rely on proving that there is enough material to justify a standalone article (why should it not be merged with another) and that the sources you have used are both suitable and plentiful. This dish does seem to have historical novelty and interest so an article might be very interesting. Documenting how the simple platters of the Haida, Tlingit and Salish have become fashionable cookery utensils could be quite an interesting detective hunt... Pyrope 19:28, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

In the present state it will not stand a chance. <major disappointment mode on> To give you an idea: User:Night of the Big Wind/Workpage5 about the Michelin starred head chef Fergus Moore recently failed on the lack of sources that proved his status. <major disappointment mode off> Night of the Big Wind _talk 20:51, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I might merge it to Salmon#Salmon_as_food. I doubt that there's really enough to be said about it to justify a separate, stand-alone article. A WP:PERMASTUB is not really desirable, and more people will see the material if it's in a larger article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:01, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I was surprised to see many individual articles for items on proprietary menus, such as BK Big Fish. I observe that people have invested significant amounts of time into inclusion in templates for the likes of McDonald's. However, as a class, these articles seem crufty by default, unless demonstrably notable. I note that regional recipe variation means that ingredients aren't even the same for nominally identical products, let alone nutritional information. Note the variation in McDonald's french fries, for example. Certainly an article on McDonald's french fries, given the dispute over vegetarian status and use of genetically modified ingredients, would seem more notable than an article on BK Big Fish. Has this issue been addressed generally already anywhere? I don't think even an article encompassing all proprietary menu items would meet notability. ENeville (talk) 00:57, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

I would opt for an article about fish burgers in general, with specific burgers in seperate paragraphs. For specific burgers like BK Big Fish is would only make an article when there is something really special with it. Same with other found items that have thousands of minor variations. Night of the Big Wind _talk 01:32, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

This discussion has been had and shot down. Please take a look at the AfD discussion for them, here. All of the articles are notable because they have met the standards for inclusion as required. Cruft is not a term that justifies the deletion of said articles. As for the French fries artile, that could have merits, but the best place for that issue is in the McDonald's article or one of its spin offs.--Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 04:56, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

That was in 2007. Opinions can change, you know. Night of the Big Wind _talk 11:00, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Indeed NotBW, having taken a look at a few of these articles I'd say that most fail WP:GNG in a fairly epic way. Most seem to rely on a passing mention in an article about the parent company, which absolutely do not conform to the substantial requirement of the guideline. The mere fact that something exists does not mean it needs space on Wikipedia. You have to prove that the item in question has attracted discussion and interest in a wider cultural sense. As the OP mentions, an article on McD's fries might pass GNG as there have been discursive articles in the press and a degree of controversy surrounding them, but the Big Fish has none. Many of the keep votes in that AfD discussion are unqualified assertions that the articles pass GNG, without ever providing evidence that they actually do. I see nothing wrong with challenging the notability of cruft (yes) like this. Pyrope 13:10, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Reflecting on referenced previous discussion, I offer that the established and preferred bases against this sort of article are WP:NOTADVERTISING, WP:NOTDIRECTORY, and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. I would note that the previous decision was for an en bloc deletion, and leaves open the possibility that any given individual article may not meet WP:N. Also, the article Burger King products already exists, and perhaps merging would be appropriate in some cases. ENeville (talk) 03:36, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Some of the articles probably can be merged, but there are at least three that should remain as they mark significant points of change in industry practices. The Original Chicken Sandwich, TenderGrill and Whopper articles are all important because each reflect specific points in the industry:

• OCS because it was part of one of the first moves made by a major fast food company to diversify its menu across demographic lines.
• TenderGrill because it the descendant of the BK Broiler, the first non-fried chicken product widely introduced by a major fast food company, and marks the beginning of the expansion of grilled chicken products in the fast food industry.
• Whopper, an iconic property in the industry and one of the most well known fast food products around.

I have actually begun looking at this course of action, but I am still working on the History of Burger King article which covers some of this along with the Burger King products and Burger King legal issues articles. There are some synergies amongst the articles, but the wholesale merger into some very large articles could be problematic. It would take several months to get these all merged together properly.

One of the major issues with the old Burger King menu article is that it was a bit of a cruft problem, I think some of these can be merged into a List of Burger King products article, because they are cited and can be supported. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:16, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Another WP:NOT that's applicable in many of these cases is the guideline against changelogs, e.g. as for bun styles or names. ENeville (talk) 21:12, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll just reiterate that you need to find sufficient sources to satisfy WP:GNG. Your assertion that these products are notable is not enough. Take the TenderGrill example, for instance. Only one reference (#8) comes even close to satisfying GNG, and even there we are talking about a very marginal single paragraph in an article about another subject, and most of the paragraph actually emphasises the significance of a different product and NOT the TenderGrill sandwich. Go away and find me an article, not published by BK or Diageo, that describes the significance of the TenderGrill and then tell me that it is significant. Until then, this still looks like cruft to me. Pyrope 14:19, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Once I merge them, some of the individual items will become stronger. The grilled chicken products actually support each other and will either be merged into a single article called BK grilled chicken sandwiches with TenderGrill, BK Broiler and BK Baguette line pointing to that article or a be a single section in the product list article. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 15:48, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:PRODUCT applies, and it would normally recommend that you boldly WP:MERGE short articles on products of dubious notability into a larger article, such as a List of Burger King products, with suitable WP:REDIRECTs to help people find what they're looking for. We can WP:PRESERVE the verifiable information without preserving a bunch of separate WP:PERMASTUBs.

However, if there's a lot to say about a couple of products, then those handful of products should probably be WP:SPLIT off, with a proper {{Main}}-style summary in the full list. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:07, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Just a quick thing, I will merge some of this stuff into list of Burger King products, which now stands as a redirect to the Burger King products article. Just as a note, the BKp article is not a simple list of what the company sells but is an article on the history of BK's menu, how & why they developed it and how they source & prepare their foodstuffs. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:01, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Most simple lists would benefit from significant expansion. There's no rule that says a list can't include descriptions, and our best lists always do. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Working

I have begun working on the merges and have developed two articles as on 23 September, could someone please take a look at BK grilled chicken sandwiches and give it a quick assessment? --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 23:17, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

The article Louisiana Gold Hot Sauce has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

article does not show notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeff Song (talk) 17:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

After a recent request, I added WikiProject Food and Drink to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and Drink/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 21:41, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I was wondering when I have to/can use the template {{WikiProject Food and drink}}. To keep it short: can I add the template to List of Michelin starred restaurants in Ireland, Kaatje bij de Sluis (and other Michelin starred restaurants) and Myrtle Allen (and other Michelin starred chefs)? Night of the Big Wind _talk 20:37, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Just letting you know that I've put up Apple for a good article reassessment since I think it no longer meets the GA criteria. You can comment here. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Appalling sourcing, I'm afraid. Should not have ever been made FL, now, it needs either completely fixed and checked over, or delisted. 86.** IP (talk) 02:51, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I am here to humbly ask that editors give their consideration to the move being discussed at Talk:Yoghurt#Move_page_to_Yogurt. Thank you. -Kai445 (talk) 05:10, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

There seems to be an edit war developing on Pico de Gallo, between me and BiggerAristotle. Additional input from other wikipedians may be helpful. This page shows some long existing text in the Health issues section, which was changed to this revision I reversed most of those edits. An objection was made that they violated WP:NOTHOW. So, I rewrote, eliminating any HOWTO-type text, and replaced the deleted citation. This morning, that edit was deleted, which I just reversed with simple Undo.

It appears to me BiggerAristotle's objection is to the citation given, as when the text was rewritten to eliminate any possibilities of HOWTO, that new paragraph was also deleted, the commonality between the two was the citation itself. This is occurring in a section titled "Health issues", and without some documentation regarding solutions, the section reads as fear-based. With the citation to some possible solutions, folks are empowered with information that may attenuate the fears. The citation itself certainly seems an excellent WHO document on various diseases sometimes transmitted by uncooked fruits and vegetables, as well as having a second section that outlines some procedures that may be used for surface cleaning of such fruits and vegetables eaten raw, personally-empowering information that gives solutions to the fear of disease outbreaks. It appears to me to be an excellent citation, precisely the type of information I would expect an encyclopedia article to include. Clearly, BiggerAristotle disagrees. Thus, any additional input from other editors would be appreciated. Gzuufy (talk) 18:38, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I notice that the greasy spoon diner special, "hot-chicken"(francais) or "hot chicken sandwich"(english) is missing from Wikipedia. Hot Chicken and Hot chicken have different meanings. Any thoughts about adding the pea covered gravy soaked sandwich to Wikipedia? 65.94.77.11 (talk) 04:31, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Yukon Gold potato could use some copyediting as a user recently wrote most of it and now the majority is a big quote. Chris857 (talk) 02:59, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

It is quite appropriate I give this request to your WikiProject Group, as today is All Soul's Day, 2011! The article on Soul cake is under the jurisdiction of a number of WikiProject groups, but does not appear to be being watched by your WikiProject as yet. Since the Soul cake is a food - indeed, if you click on the external links following the article, some take you to recipes for soul cakes - I wonder whether your WikiProject would like to oversee this article? Many thanks if you could look at this article, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 16:45, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. I've tagged it with the project banner and assessed it. I'm not able to improve on it, though I hope another editor can. Boneyard90 (talk) 20:38, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Can some one please have a look at the article on cake? What does need a good edit is the section on history, which at present, makes misleading claims about pizza being distinguishable from pizza (and where I live, the United Kingdom, we never take pizzas to be cakes). I shall be grateful if some one with knowledge can tidy up this section. Many thanks, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:51, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done Article was vandalized by several people. The mess is clean up and cake is now related to bread, instead of pizza. Night of the Big Wind _talk 00:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I would like to notify WikiProject Food and Drink that a proposal for Wikiproject Poultry has been made and since many articles covering dishes using poultry will partly fall under WikiProject Poultry, I thought it best to notify you of the proposal. If anyone is interested in supporting this Wikiproject, please go to the hyperlink above. Anjwalker ^Talk 03:13, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

It's about why I think coca-cola needs it own history page. I said it on this talk page. I want an expert to help me out with this. BlazeTheMovieFan (talk) 22:44, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

if we're mentioning a foreign dish/ingredient that has an English name should we say

''foreign name'' ([[english name]])

[[english name]] (''foreign name'') — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.193.24.148 (talk) 00:54, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Many articles have infoboxes with nutritional information. This makes some sense for things that are more-or-less consistent, including individual vegetables like carrots or branded specialties like Milk Duds. But it doesn't make sense to have nutritional information about, say, falafel or milk shakes or hummus which have widely varying recipes. Falafel, for example, can be made with fava beans or chickpeas (or a mixture); depending on how it is fried, its oil content will vary tremendously. I propose that we systematically avoid nutritional information boxes for articles which are not standard. Comments? --Macrakis (talk) 03:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

This seems to be a flaw in the source more then anything. The document upon which this data is based is very poorly presented and is almost opaque as regards its own sourcing and QA/QC procedure. The data is sparse, at best, and it takes diligence and a brain that can cope with illogical data documentation to find it. Very poor when you consider that this was a USFDA publication. The falafel example that you cite is indeed bizarre. Quoting nutritional data for any foodstuff, standard or not, to four significant figures is scientifically unjustifiable. As a professional analytical chemist I would say that quoting any basic compositional data to four significant figures is dubious without significant QA/QC justification, which just isn't present in the source provided. However, I don't think there is an inherent problem with presenting some sort of data for any foodstuff, but there really ought to be some sort of disclaimer regarding the reliability and provenance of the data given, and an emphasis that the data shown are (in most cases) merely indicative rather than definitive. How to do that within the strictures of the WP:OR policy is going to be the tricky bit. Pyrope 14:28, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Agreed about the absurd false precision. Even if the measurement technique is that exact, almost all foodstuffs (except perhaps salt, refined white sugar, and vodka) will vary so much that that precision is meaningless. The Institute of Medicine's report Nutrition labeling: issues and directions for the 1990s, p. 109 looks like a very reliable source and is quite clear that most foods vary more than ±20%, so I'd think that at most we should use 2 significant digits. The report also points out that vitamin and trace mineral content can vary by large factors.

Have you read "Composition of Foods Raw, Processed, Prepared USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 24" http://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/12354500/Data/SR24/sr24_doc.pdf ? I haven't yet. --Macrakis (talk) 19:10, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I had a quick read, but it didn't really help matters. It just states that data were drawn from all over the place, but doesn't provide a way of cross checking where data for any particular entry came from. The problem we have with trimming the sigfigs used in the data presented is that some could (likely will) argue that constitutes OR. I think some sort or boilerplate caveat based on the reference you provide could be built into the infobox which would serve as a warning not to take the absilute values too seriously (±100% for some nutrients... sheesh!). Pyrope 16:49, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

And if they do, then you can point them at the {{supplement}} WP:NOTOR#Simple_calculations, which directly says that rounding is acceptable. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:52, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of that MoS entry, so that might make things easier. However, I think with the wide range of compositions that the Institute of Medicine's report indicates a caveat would still be appropriate. Pyrope 17:18, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

If you look at the article on Dundee Cake, you will see that it badly needs some attention. Until quite recently, this was very much a stub - in fact, there was little information beside information that a cake of that name existed and was a type of fruit cake! However, I did try to extend it myself - I found it had relevance to Keiller's marmalade, although everything I added was information I had gleaned from a Google search! I shall appreciate it if some one could look at this article and could give it a little more content, if she or he has knowledge of this subject. Also, could this cake please be added to the List of cakes article? Many thanks, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 12:08, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Actually, having looked at articles in the category "Cakes", I see that quite few could do with some attention. I am trying to find out where the Swiss Roll originated - was it in the United Kingdom, or in Central Europe? Wikipedia articles contradict each other on this point! ACEOREVIVED (talk) 16:06, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

If cakes tickle your sweet tooth then go ahead. Well done on the data you've added to the Dundee Cake article already. I'm sure that there are a whole lot of interesting material out there that you can mine for information. A very quick search provides a reference to "Dundee cake" in an advert from The Lancet in 1853, and that the Keiller's origin for the cake seems to have been discussed since at least the 1950s. Additionally, the first reference to "Swiss Roll" that I unearthed was in a discussion of a cinema advert for a Derbyshire bakery from 1925. The creators of the ad certainly seemed to think that the name was a branding exercise and not a genuinely Swiss recipe, but whether that bakery was building on the buche de noel rolled cake that Europe produces I haven't a clue. Sounds like you've found yourself an interesting and esoteric line of enquiry, but make sure you remember that any data you present has to be backed by reputable sources. Pyrope 17:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your response - when I said that there were quite a few examples in the category "Cakes" that need expansion, I should have given you some examples. The classic example is Sesame seed cake - which seems to be a single sentence to say that the cakes are made of sesame seeds and are often sweetened with [[honey]! The articles on Sfouf, foam cake, Tu (cake), Joffre cake and Garash cake do not say much, either. By the way, I appreciate the research you have done into the name "Swiss roll". The article List of cakes claims that these originated in the United Kingdom, but the article Swiss roll says it originated in Central Europe. From all of my Google searches, I did not find much that did not appear to replicate what is in the Wikipedia article! Again, thank you for your help and response, it is appreciated. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 00:16, 18 November 2011 (UTC) Also, Berlingozzo does not say much! ACEOREVIVED (talk) 09:10, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

By the way, I noticed that there were several articles in this category which were not actually cakes, but television programmes, such as Ace of Cakes. I have now removed these from the category. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 00:28, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

I have now seen that there is a separate category "British cakes" - the article Date and walnut loaf is in there but does not say much! ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:49, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Nor do the articles on Kladdkaka or Tunis cake say much! ACEOREVIVED (talk) 11:13, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

If anyone is interested in helping me to improve the Cracker Barrel article, I've actually just posted a painstakingly researched and carefully written replacement draft to my userspace, here. Although the current article has become neglected and is not especially good, for now I am not being bold because I've actually written it at Cracker Barrel's behest. However, I have posted a fairly detailed explanation of what is new and different—and why—on the Cracker Barrel discussion page. If you'd like to review it, make any changes you think are necessary or suggest some, and then copy the new version into the main space, I'd be very appreciative. At the very least, any constructive feedback is welcome. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 22:20, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

That article is in very bad shape. I can already see issues including WP:Undue, WP:Soap and other problems. There are too many images and not enough citations. It needs a major over haul. I did some quick trimming, but it needs significantly more work. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 09:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Yep, those were absolutely issues with the previous version, and I'm glad you liked my overhaul enough to copy it over. I'm not quite done with my effort; I would still like to find a few more quality, acceptably-licensed images to illustrate the article, so this will be my next step. Cheers, WWB Too (talk) 14:14, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Can some one please sort this matter out? Wikipedia has separate articles on angel cake and angel food cake - in fact, the article on Angel Cake has a tag at the top which says "Not to be confused with Angel food cake. Yet, if you click on the talk page for angel cake, you get redirected to the talk page for angel food cake! Can I please request that if we are to have two separate articles on these two types of cakes, we should have two different talk pages for them? Many thanks if some one could sort this out - otherwise, it seems absurd to have two separate articles but only one talk page! ACEOREVIVED (talk) 16:15, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

It was a left over from an earlier move. when Paul (talk · contribs) created the article over the redirect placed here after the move, he never fixed the talk page. I corrected it, copy edited both pages and added a hat note at Angel food cake. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 17:32, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for sorting this matter out - it appears to have been cleared up now. Again, many thanks, 20:08, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Vitamin E is a powerful antioxidant that plays an essential role in protecting cell membranes and plasma lipoproteins from free-radical damage. Free radicals contain an unpaired electron and react readily with polyunsaturated fatty acids, proteins, carbohydrates and DNA. Vitamin E is able to “neutralize” free radicals because the hydroxyl group of the chromanol ring readily givs up an electron or hydride group to the free radical. Through this oxidative reaction, the unpaired electron in the free radical becomes paires (less reactive); however, the hydroxyl group on the vitamin E now has an unpaired electron. This resultant vitamin E radical (Vit E . ) can react with another free radical and be permanently inactivated to the stable vitamin E quinone (VIT E=O) or it can be regenerated to active vitamin E (Vit E-OH) by reacting with vitamin C or glutathione. Fatty acids with two or more double bonds (i.e. polyunsaturated) are abundant in all cell membranes and have an important influence on membrane fluidity and function. However, their double bonds make them susceptible to oxidation by free radicals. Fortunately, most vitamin E in the body is found in cell membranes where it functions to protect polyunsaturated fatty acids from free-radical attack. In the event that a fatty acid radical is produced, vitamin E stabilizes the free radical and prevents it from reacting with adjacent polyunsaturated fatty acids and propagating the reaction along the membrane with disastrous consequences. There is an elaborate interrelationship between vitamin E and other antioxidant nutrient systems in the body. The most direct interaction is with vitamin C, which serves to regenerate vitamin E from its radical state. Glutathione can also regenerate vitamin E, thus explaining the interaction with sulphur amino acids. Antioxidant systems such as superoxide dismutase, catalase, glutathione peroxidase and vitamin C help to eliminate free radicals, thereby reducing oxidant stress on membranes and preserving vitamin E. However, if membrane vitamin E is deficient, high levels of other antioxidants cannot prevent the peroxidation of membrane polyunsaturated fatty acids, although they may delay the damage. Plasma lipoproteins, like cell membranes, contain an abundance of lipid including proportions of polyunsaturated fatty acids. They also contain fat-soluble vitamin E, which plays an essential role in protecting the lipoproteins from oxidative damage. This is particularly important in low-density lipoproteins (LDLs) because lipid peroxides can oxidize apolipoprotein B resulting the formation of oxidatively modified LDL. This oxidized LDL accumulates in the walls of arteries at a greater rate than normal LDL (i.e. non-oxidized), thus accelerating the development of atherosclerotic plaques, which can lead to cardiovascular disease.

Essentials of Human Nutrition Third Edition Edited by Jim Mann and Stewart Truswell Chapter 12 - Vitamins C and E — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.117.231 (talk) 21:07, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Does anyone know how to go about compiling a list of vegetable fats? In this discussion, two other editors and I have determined that the vegetable fats currently listed on List of vegetable oils should probably be split off into their own list at List of vegetable fats, but we're unsure how many other vegetable fats there are or how we might determine what they are. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Neelix (talk) 03:00, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

The article Spirit ratings has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability of subject not established. No independent third party coverage of any of the ratings organizations covered in this article. No criteria given for "major" ratings organizations. No indication that any ratings are notable at all.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Brianhe (talk) 18:27, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Any magazine concerning wines or spirits will have reviews, either by some third party like BTI or their own writers. Pick one up and you'll see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.193.24.148 (talk) 00:02, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I've nominated List of culinary nuts as a featured list candidate. This is part of an effort to increase the number of food and drink-related featured lists. Currently there's just List of vegetable oils. This is an invitation to participate in the discussion. It's unlikely that the candidacy will be successful if no interest is shown in the article nomination. If the application is successful, I plan to bring a number of other food and drink-related lists up to featured list quality, and go through the nomination process. Waitak (talk) 15:48, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, there is a significant lack of FL-, FA- and FM-class food and drink content here on the English Wikipedia. Any help increasing the number of these is appreciated. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 16:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Just a note that there still hasn't been even a single comment on the FLC discussion for the article so far. I'm not optimistic that the nomination will succeed unless the discussion sees some expression of interest, so please participate, even if it's only a sentence or two. Waitak (talk) 01:27, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Update needed to IBA Official Cocktail to reflect new International Bartenders Association list of official cocktails released November 24, 2011

The page for the International Bartenders Association (IBA) list of official cocktails still has the 2004 recipes listed. The IBA released a new recipe list a couple of weeks ago. It's available at http://www.iba-world.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=88&Itemid=532 (the link on the Wikipedia page to the old list is also broken now).

The page should probably be updated to reflect the IBA's changes. That said, the IBA isn't making their old recipe lists available online anymore, and the new list is missing some old recipes (Cosmopolitan, White Russian, God Father, etc.), so the 2004 list should probably be kept up for posterity somehow, as well. I'm not sure how best to handle it, though. 205.193.94.40 (talk) 16:03, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Does the project have specific notability guidelines? My question arises from this AfD discussion. I would be amazed if a Michelin star recipient was not of itself notable, but I may be mistaken. RashersTierney (talk) 22:24, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Not an answer on your question, but a summary of previous discussions. Official status: zero point zero. See: User:Night of the Big Wind/Michelin restaurants Night of the Big Wind _talk 00:42, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Answers my question quite well. Interesting page. Thanks. RashersTierney (talk) 16:40, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually there was a discussion about restaurant notability standards several years ago that died due to apathy. I can say that one of the things that did not grant notability was Michelin ratings. Please see the Michelin article for the precise reasons why, but there are allegations of inherent bias to non-French restaurants, overworked & underpaid reviewers and a lack of standards based metrics in the awarding of stars. This is why subjective sources are not used in determining notability, even with the prominence and knowledge of Michelin reviews. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 13:29, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I would also point out that the standard for notability isn't in winning any sort of award, it is in significant coverage in multiple, reliable, secondary sources. Winning an award may be expected to bring the establishment to the notice of the general public, but there are Michelin-starred restaurants that are virtually unknown outside their immediate locality, so the mere awarding of a Michelin star does not indicate notability. Pyrope 14:30, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Certainly a single Michelin star does not make a restaurant notable by WP standards. Three stars correlate with notability, exactly as Pyrope says, because they virtually guarantee "significant coverage in multiple, reliable, secondary sources". Two stars in themselves don't seem to be a good measure of notability. --Macrakis (talk) 16:12, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

The Michelin Guide certainly has its POV. But do you guys don't have your own POV? The Guide is not, or not so long, active in your country. Even the Michelin Guide has to grow in that. The French cuisine is well known and widely spread, so no wonder they start with judging that cuisine.

As far as I know (= Dutch and Irish situation) having just one star is enough to generate loads and loads of publicity. Even in Ireland there were several national newspaper articles saying that absolutely nothing had changed with the Michelin stars (so I did not look up the local papers)... Night of the Big Wind _talk 17:59, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

The problem is not the POV, which itself is an issue, it is the subjective nature of the review. There are no defined metrics used by the guide unlike say the fortune 500. The awarding of a star in the Michelin guide is done by a reviewer, and the sources in the article state that these reviewers are far from reliable. Second, a Michelin star isn't an award, it is a rating using a scale of 0-3 that the reviewers grant just like the other arbitrary scales that other reviewers use (think "Two thumbs up", "9/10" etc).

What we have to do is step away from the fame of the guide, and look at these issues. These very issues mean that the guide cannot be used to establish notability. This doesn't mean it cannot be used to establish verifiability, is simply means that we cannot say that Micheline reviewed it highly, therefore it is notable. That is what is at the route of what Pyrope stated in his comment. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 19:13, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Precisely. Perhaps in Ireland having one Michelin star is sufficient "to generate loads and loads of publicity", but so far as Wikipedia is concerned it is that publicity (as reflected in newspaper articles, magazine spreads, etc.) that makes the restaurant notable, not the star itself. The more general the source of the publicity, the more significant the coverage. Coverage amounting to a multiple paragraph write-up in a catering industry gazette is pretty minor, while a few lines in the editorial section (note, not the restaurant reviews section!) of a national general-circulation newspaper (e.g. the NYT, De Telegraaf, Die Zeit, the Guardian, etc.) is huge. Literally thousands of restaurants have had stars awarded, only for them to fail in short order. You need to demonstrate that the restaurant in question has made more of a cultural and societal impact (e.g. Delmonico's, the Fat Duck, French Laundry, etc.) than simply being ranked as good by one review company. Take the article on De Swaen, for an example. That article has only one reference that seems to satisfy WP:GNG. The rest are either related to a different restaurant (albeit in the the same location), are directly controlled by the restaurant or its successor, are a catering supply company's promotional blog, are Michelin star summary tables, or merely a log of court proceedings. None of these meet the full requirement for significant, reliable and secondary sources, and with only one reference that does the article also fails the "multiple" requirement as well. In fact, the De Swaen article is a good case in point as to why we need more than mere star ratings to justify pages. About all that page says at present is "once upon a time there was a restaurant, it occasionally had a Michelin star rating, now it is gone." I'm generally an inclusionist where Wikipedia articles are concerned, so I am not about to start a purge to get rid of all restaurants whose only notability claim is the posession of a Michelin star, but the reason that we have the General Notability Guideline is that Wikipedia is supposed to be a general purpose encyclopedia. The articles are supposed to be significant and, crucially, readable. People mistake an encyclopedia for being a collection of everything that ever existed, but in reality they are collections of things that are worth learning about. If you can't say more than "this thing existed" then it makes for a fairly pointless and boring entry. I don't want to stop people being pointless and boring, but as one person's pointless and boring is another's fascinating and instructive we have the GNG as an independent measure of the degree of notability. Pyrope 20:08, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

The problem is the difference in status of the Michelin Guide on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. In the USA and Canada it is just a Guide, like so many others. In Europe it is a Food Bible. Michelin starred restaurants are not the only category of notable restaurants, it is just a subset of all notable restaurants'. Night of the Big Wind _talk 20:15, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Well I'm British, and I have spent many happy weeks travelling and eating in France and the rest of continental Europe and I disagree. Some people regard it as a bible, some do not. Some regard it as puffed up, illogical, biased and subjective, but some think that it can do no wrong. I've eaten in starred restaurants that have taken my breath away for good reasons, and I've eaten in others that took it away for entirely bad reasons. This is the problem as it is, and our perceptions of it are, subjective. These are just my experiences, and so far as Wikipedia is concerned they count not one jot. That is why notability requires multiple, significant, independent, reliable sources. While the Michelin Red Guide can contribute to that, it cannot establish notability in the absence of any additional sources meeting GNG. Pyrope 20:39, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

As I said earlier, this overview has no formal status. But what is quite interesting in this discussion is a part of WP:ORG as it states in its footnotes: Inclusion in "best of", "top 100", and similar lists generally does not count towards notability, unless the list itself is so notable that each entry can be presumed notable. Examples of the latter include the Fortune 500 or a Michelin Guide to restaurants. Night of the Big Wind _talk 00:35, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

There's a difference between counting towards notability, and being the sole criteria for establishing it. Your summary does not carry any weight whatsoever, but then it does beg the question of why you bothered. As I said just a few lines above, the Red Guide can contribute toward establishing notability, but it cannot be the sole criteria. Pyrope 02:20, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

The reason I wrote the overview is due to a number of nominations recently of my articles. One of the nominators later agreed that he had never heard of Michelin stars, another one nominated because all the sources were in Dutch. But none of them had a clue about the importance of Michelin stars in Europe. In a European context (!) a Michelin star is extremely important and it can make or break a restaurant. Funny enough I worked today on an article about Wynn Las Vegas, that has a Michelin star for its Chinese-style restaurant "Wing-Lei"! Night of the Big Wind _talk 16:43, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Proposed change

For those above who do not have the relevant page on watch, Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies)#Issue with this statement raises a relevant point mentioned above. RashersTierney (talk) 17:23, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't post this here earlier, but the original post was done while I was at a lunch break while heading to a family get together halfway across the US. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 01:26, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

No prob. Hopefully the more interested editors involved, the more definitively we can get this anomaly sorted out. RashersTierney (talk) 01:31, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

It is a way off course to win a discussion that you did not win on arguments. It give me a real nasty feeling... Night of the Big Wind _talk 02:07, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I have made no arguments. I only offered an opinion in the discussion you are inferring to, which I stated in my post to said discussion. I am trying to clear up the matter so we have a more concrete understanding of the situation and so that the policy is more clear. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 22:52, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for your responses to my comments in the past. This time, I wished to comment on the article List of pies. If you look at this list, you will see that it contains references to tarts such as the Bakewell_tart. I wonder, therefore, whether the name of this article should be changed to "List of pies and tarts"? What do people think? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:17, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

It would be a good start to make clear what the difference is between a pie and a tart. Night of the Big Wind _talk 22:37, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Pies and tarts are related but are not the same. A tart is typically a shallow confection, usually about 1 in (2.5 cm) deep, that has a filling and no top crust. Pies are deeper, usually about 2 in (5.1 cm)-3 in (7.6 cm) deep, and usually covered, but not always. Additionally, both have savory versions as well. A similar comparison could be made between cakes and quick breads. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 17:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback here. You may be interested in the discussion that is going on Wikipedia: Requested Moves for December 8 2011. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 15:45, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

A discussion at the Village Pumps suggests that having WikiProjects (or their task forces) call their advice pages "guidelines" is confusing at least some editors into thinking that they're the same as the "official" community-wide guidelines like WP:Reliable sources. WP:POLICY#Naming generally discourages the use of terms like "guideline" or "policy" in page names even for regular policies anyway. So some of the WikiProjects are renaming their pages to something like "Article advice", "Recommendations", or "Style advice". This is just a friendly suggestion that your group consider doing the same. There are templates listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Advice_pages if you want to tag the pages that way.

While you're at it, if it's been a long time since anyone overhauled those pages, this might be a good time to do that, too. I don't know what the history is for your group, but it's pretty typical for a page to get written and then neglected for a long time. If you happen to find anything that no longer matches up with the community-wide Manual of Style or other general guidelines, then perhaps it would be good to fix it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:05, 20 December 2011 (UTC)