Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/Archive 43

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42Archive 43Archive 44

Input requested

There is a discussion in the thread Talk:Turkish coffee#Revert. Your input is welcome. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 17:17, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Wong's King

While another editor insists on tagging the article, I'm actually interested in promoting Wong's King to Good article status. I've fleshed out the article, but there's one area where I'm slightly confused and that's about the restaurant chain's establishment. As noted here, I'm not sure how the chain was founded in 2004 but a source says the Estacada location opened in 1998.

Would anyone care to join me in finalizing this entry and co-nominating for Good article status? I've done the heavy lifting, I just need a bit of help with the early history. Please hit me up if you are interested. @Ɱ and SounderBruce: Pinging for your consideration, based on your work on restaurant entries. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:45, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Restoring older Featured articles to standard:
year-end 2022 summary

Unreviewed featured articles/2020 (URFA/2020) is a systematic approach to reviewing older Featured articles (FAs) to ensure they still meet the FA standards. A January 2022 Signpost article called "Forgotten Featured" explored the effort.

Progress is recorded at the monthly stats page. Through 2022, with 4,526 very old (from the 2004–2009 period) and old (2010–2015) FAs initially needing review:

  • 357 FAs were delisted at Featured article review (FAR).
  • 222 FAs were kept at FAR or deemed "satisfactory" by three URFA reviewers, with hundreds more being marked as "satisfactory", but awaiting three reviews.
  • FAs needing review were reduced from 77% of total FAs at the end of 2020 to 64% at the end of 2022.

Of the FAs kept, deemed satisfactory by three reviewers, or delisted, about 60% had prior review between 2004 and 2007; another 20% dated to the period from 2008–2009; and another 20% to 2010–2015. Roughly two-thirds of the old FAs reviewed have retained FA status or been marked "satisfactory", while two-thirds of the very old FAs have been defeatured.

Entering its third year, URFA is working to help maintain FA standards; FAs are being restored not only via FAR, but also via improvements initiated after articles are reviewed and talk pages are noticed. Since the Featured Article Save Award (FASA) was added to the FAR process a year ago, 38 FAs were restored to FA status by editors other than the original FAC nominator. Ten FAs restored to status have been listed at WP:MILLION, recognizing articles with annual readership over a million pageviews, and many have been rerun as Today's featured article, helping increase mainpage diversity.

Examples of 2022 "FAR saves" of very old featured articles
All received a Million Award

But there remain almost 4,000 old and very old FAs to be reviewed. Some topic areas and WikiProjects have been more proactive than others in restoring or maintaining their old FAs. As seen in the chart below, the following have very high ratios of FAs kept to those delisted (ordered from highest ratio):

  • Biology
  • Physics and astronomy
  • Warfare
  • Video gaming

and others have a good ratio of kept to delisted FAs:

  • Literature and theatre
  • Engineering and technology
  • Religion, mysticism and mythology
  • Media
  • Geology and geophysics

... so kudos to those editors who pitched in to help maintain older FAs !

FAs reviewed at URFA/2020 through 2022 by content area
FAs reviewed at URFA/2020 from November 21, 2020 to December 31, 2022 (VO, O)
Topic area Delisted Kept Total
Reviewed 		Ratio
Kept to
Delisted
(overall 0.62) 		Remaining to review
for
2004–7 promotions
Art, architecture and archaeology 10 6 16 0.60 19
Biology 13 41 54 3.15 67
Business, economics and finance 6 1 7 0.17 2
Chemistry and mineralogy 2 1 3 0.50 7
Computing 4 1 5 0.25 0
Culture and society 9 1 10 0.11 8
Education 22 1 23 0.05 3
Engineering and technology 3 3 6 1.00 5
Food and drink 2 0 2 0.00 3
Geography and places 40 6 46 0.15 22
Geology and geophysics 3 2 5 0.67 1
Health and medicine 8 3 11 0.38 5
Heraldry, honors, and vexillology 11 1 12 0.09 6
History 27 14 41 0.52 38
Language and linguistics 3 0 3 0.00 3
Law 11 1 12 0.09 3
Literature and theatre 13 14 27 1.08 24
Mathematics 1 2 3 2.00 3
Media 14 10 24 0.71 40
Meteorology 15 6 21 0.40 31
Music 27 8 35 0.30 55
Philosophy and psychology 0 1 1 – 2
Physics and astronomy 3 7 10 2.33 24
Politics and government 19 4 23 0.21 9
Religion, mysticism and mythology 14 14 28 1.00 8
Royalty and nobility 10 6 16 0.60 44
Sport and recreation 32 12 44 0.38 39
Transport 8 2 10 0.25 11
Video gaming 3 5 8 1.67 23
Warfare 26 49 75 1.88 31
Total 359 Note A 222 Note B 581 0.62 536

Noting some minor differences in tallies:

  • A URFA/2020 archives show 357, which does not include those delisted which were featured after 2015; FAR archives show 358, so tally is off by at least one, not worth looking for.
  • B FAR archives show 63 kept at FAR since URFA started at end of Nov 2020. URFA/2020 shows 61 Kept at FAR, meaning two kept were outside of scope of URFA/2020. Total URFA/2020 Keeps (Kept at FAR plus those with three Satisfactory marks) is 150 + 72 = 222.

But looking only at the oldest FAs (from the 2004–2007 period), there are 12 content areas with more than 20 FAs still needing review: Biology, Music, Royalty and nobility, Media, Sport and recreation, History, Warfare, Meteorology, Physics and astronomy, Literature and theatre, Video gaming, and Geography and places. In the coming weeks, URFA/2020 editors will be posting lists to individual WikiProjects with the goal of getting these oldest-of-the-old FAs reviewed during 2023.

Ideas for how you can help are listed below and at the Signpost article.

  • Review a 2004 to 2007 FA. With three "Satisfactory" marks, article can be moved to the FAR not needed section.
  • Review "your" articles: Did you nominate a featured article between 2004 and 2015 that you have continuously maintained? Check these articles, update as needed, and mark them as 'Satisfactory' at URFA/2020. A continuously maintained FA is a good predictor that standards are still met, and with two more "Satisfactory" marks, "your" articles can be listed as "FAR not needed". If they no longer meet the FA standards, please begin the FAR process by posting your concerns on the article's talk page.
  • Review articles that already have one "Satisfactory" mark: more FAs can be indicated as "FAR not needed" if other reviewers will have a look at those already indicated as maintained by the original nominator. If you find issues, you can enter them at the talk page.
  • Fix an existing featured article: Choose an article at URFA/2020 or FAR and bring it back to FA standards. Enlist the help of the original nominator, frequent FA reviewers, WikiProjects listed on the talk page, or editors that have written similar topics. When the article returns to FA standards, please mark it as 'Satisfactory' at URFA/2020 or note your progress in the article's FAR.
  • Review and nominate an article to FAR that has been 'noticed' of a FAR needed but issues raised on talk have not been addressed. Sometimes nominating at FAR draws additional editors to help improve the article that would otherwise not look at it.

More regular URFA and FAR reviewers will help assure that FAs continue to represent examples of Wikipedia's best work. If you have any questions or feedback, please visit Wikipedia talk:Unreviewed featured articles/2020/4Q2022.

FAs last reviewed from 2004 to 2007 of interest to this WikiProject

If you review an article on this list, please add commentary at the article talk page, with a section heading == [[URFA/2020]] review== and also add either Notes or Noticed to WP:URFA/2020A, per the instructions at WP:URFA/2020. If comments are not entered on the article talk page, they may be swept up in archives here and lost. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:36, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

  1. George Washington (inventor)
  2. Maraba coffee
  3. Medieval cuisine


James Beard nominations, 2023

Time to start updating (and possibly creating some new) articles!

https://www.jamesbeard.org/blog/the-2023-james-beard-awards-semifinalists

---Another Believer (Talk) 18:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Cuisine of the Thirteen Colonies

Cuisine of the Thirteen Colonies has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for French cuisine

French cuisine has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Israeli cuisine

Israeli cuisine has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Pinot noir#Requested move 31 January 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Pinot noir#Requested move 31 January 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 11:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Radish

Radish has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:33, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Hot chocolate

Hot chocolate has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:47, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Riesling

Riesling has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:58, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Meetup notice

Happy editing, ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:32, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Waffle iron, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 6 February 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Requested move at Talk:Alkaline pasta#Requested move 1 February 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Alkaline pasta#Requested move 1 February 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Favonian (talk) 13:45, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Food, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Notability tags at restaurant lists

An editor has added notability tags to:

These lists are similar to those Wikipedia has for many types of cuisine. I don't see the tags as necessary, but another editor keeps trying to interfere with restaurant articles I've worked on. Would other editors take a look and determine if the tags are necessary? ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:19, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Talk:Frybread#“ This article is about the American regional food. For other types of fried bread, see fried bread.”

The problem is, as I say there, "No, it Covers fried bread and a number of other areas. And Fried bread is a stub mentioning the US and the UK." Doug Weller talk 10:22, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Hm, it looks like it's gotten a bit bastardized. Fry bread is definitely a thing of its own, though. I think the article needs to be trimmed of all the "varieties", or they could be moved into the similar foods section. Fry bread has a distinct history and culture. Valereee (talk) 12:41, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Should we move List of Irish themed restaurants

Another editor moved List of Irish restaurants to List of Irish themed restaurants. I had created the page intending to list notable restaurants serving Irish cuisine. Do any project members care to weigh in at Talk:List of Irish themed restaurants? ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:31, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Can someone fix archive bot?

Resolved

Could someone fix the archive bot so that discussions aren't always posted to archive pages 2 and 3? ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:45, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

@Another Believer: This is the |counter=3 parameter in the {{User:MiszaBot/config}} at the top of this page. The cause of the problem is that when Hike395 (talk · contribs) set up auto archiving on 8 August 2022, they put |counter=1 instead of setting it to the number of the most recent existing archive, i.e. |counter=41. I'm sure I've explained this before. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:14, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
@Redrose64: Thanks! So this should fix the problem? ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:48, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Yes, except that threads automatically moved to archives 1, 2 & 3 will stay there. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:21, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Fixed the misplaced threads: moved to 41. Apologies for making a mess. — hike395 (talk) 01:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
@Redrose64 and Hike395: Thanks, both! I've marked this section as resolved. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:57, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Sugar-apple#Requested move 14 March 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sugar-apple#Requested move 14 March 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 15:54, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

There is a split proposal ongoing at Talk:Stromboli#Split proposal to split Mount Stromboli off from the article about the island which is currently at Stromboli. The split proposal doesn't clearly say what will remain at that location, whether it will be Stromboli (disambiguation), Stromboli (island), or possibly Stromboli (food). Input would be appreciated in that split proposal and especially the subsection Talk:Stromboli#Discussion on fate of Stromboli link. Thank you. —DIYeditor (talk) 13:19, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:21, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

"Schiften"

I am Dutch, and in the Netherlands, we frequently use the word "schiften" to describe an emulsion, such as mayonnaise or butter, splitting after e.g. being stored in a household freezer. There's even an Dutch-language Wikipedia article about it, namely nl:schiften. I think in English it's called "separation" (going by, for example, "Freezing will cause mayonnaise to separate." here). May I suggest on this Talk page that someone create an English-language article about this "schiften". It's not a made-up thing, it's actually something that happens (exists) in the real world, and to me that would make it suitable to have an encyclopedic article. It is also something that can happen to magma, as described in this Nature.com article; I think they call it "unmixing" among other things. --2001:1C06:19CA:D600:572E:B87C:E550:A26F (talk) 07:14, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Junior Bake Off (series 8)

More contributions to improve the draft article about the eighth season of Junior Bake Off are welcome. George Ho (talk) 08:50, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Italics

Could someone (more than someone) help me italicise all the words, of foodstuffs, that are not common in the English language? Example: "Vermicelli" (I've definitely made mistakes within these pages; I'll double-check when we've fixed the problem I pointed out; in any case, if you find mistakes I've made, feel free to correct them). JackkBrown (talk) 03:05, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

British chefs like Nigella Lawson and American chefs like Martha Stewart do not italicize capellini. The New York Times does not italicize capellini. Major pasta manufacturers do not italicize capellini in their English language content. The Food Network does not italicize capellini. Why on earth should Wikipedia? Cullen328 (talk) 19:33, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Last I heard, vermicelli was not italicised and also quite common. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:01, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Junior Bake Off (series 7) nominated for deletion

I started the deletion discussion on Junior Bake Off (series 7). Your inputs there are welcome. George Ho (talk) 17:41, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Cactus Cooler

Could some one from this WikiProject take a look at Cactus Cooler? Someone recently tried to expand it but much of the new content wasn't very well cited (mainly to a blog site and social media) and there were also some health related claims being made. I tried to clean things up a bit and keep the stuff that seemed reliably sourced, but I typically don't work on articles like this. Perhaps someone who's more experienced with this genre of article could also take a look and figure out if any further clean up is needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:37, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Conagra Brands request

Hi editors, I'm Rachel and I work for Conagra Brands. I made a small request on the Conagra Brands Talk page to update some financial information. Would anyone here be interested in taking a look? I'm doing my best to follow all the COI rules so I won't make any edits myself. I'd appreciate the help! RWConagra (talk) 19:19, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Main Deli Steak House

Should Main Deli Steak House (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) have the name of this restaurant as it appears on the sign in front of the restaurant in the article? (which also happens to be the official name) It's been deleted as being a contravention to "common name" (what that means I don't know, since WP:COMMONNAME is an article page name policy and not an article content policy) -- Several other restaurants also seem to have had the names on their signs stripped from the articles in favour of only using the "common name" in the text of the article.

-- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 05:52, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Chris Kempczinski

Hello, WikiProject Food and Drink editors! On behalf of McDonald's, I've submitted a few requests to update the page for president and CEO Chris Kempczinski. In addition to a proposed addition about his current tenure, I've suggested adding mention of his Economic Club of Chicago speech and adding additional text about his tenure as president of McDonald's USA.

User:Crystallizedcarbon and User:FeldBum have been helpful in updating the article on my behalf, but these requests remain unanswered and I'm hoping some editors here may be able to help. Thanks for your consideration. MattMcDonalds (talk) 17:27, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Energy Brands accuracy

The Energy Brands and Mike Repole articles both include inaccuracies about the founding. J. Darius Bikoff founded the company in 1996; Repole joined as President in 1998. This is well documented and can be sourced by: The New York Times, MetroWest Daily, The Star Democrat, The Tampa Tribune, El Nuevo Herald, Newsday (Nassau Edition), The SEC filing for the company, and This listing in New York State's Division of Corporations, when searching for entity use DOS ID:2032244. Both articles should be corrected accordingly. 173.63.84.27 (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Should there be a category for "Italian diaspora cuisine" or similar?

I was just reviewing Conti roll, an Italian-Australian dish, and noticed that there doesn't appear to be a category under which both Italian-American and Italian-Australian dishes would fall (as well as any other diaspora Italian dishes not actually found in Italy). Should we create a category like Category:Italian diaspora cuisine or similar? MatthewVanitas (talk) 07:59, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Risotto alla milanese

Hello, WikiProject,

I've been preventing this article from being deleted as an expired draft for quite some time now. But I know nothing about writing about food, it just seemed like there might be something worthwhile in this draft. But I'm posting notice of it here in case someone else wants to work on it over the next six months. Thanks for considering my request. Liz Read! Talk! 03:53, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Conagra history request

Hi editors, I had another request I thought folks here may be interested in. It's about the history of Conagra Brands from 1950-1970. I was able to dig up some more sources that I think really help flesh that section out. I'd really appreciate it if someone here would be willing to take a look and offer any feedback! I work for Conagra so I can't make any changes myself. RWConagra (talk) 15:35, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Brotzeit (restaurant) § Please help with finding reliable sources

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Brotzeit (restaurant) § Please help with finding reliable sources. SmileySnail (talk) 23:30, 07 July 2023 (UTC)

Proposal for renaming Food security during the COVID-19 pandemic

Good evening! Please see Talk:Food_security_during_the_COVID-19_pandemic#Renaming. Fourmidable (talk) 17:39, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

More restaurant entries at AfD

Seeking editor feedback for the following restaurant entries at AfD:

---Another Believer (Talk) 15:14, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

How to remove FODMAP from Category:Food and drink articles needing attention to grammar?

Howdy. I did a couple of copyedit passes over FODMAP, and along with whatever fixes preceded me, I think it's safe to remove it from Category:Food and drink articles needing attention to grammar now. I don't see how that's getting populated, though. --Dan Harkless (talk) 09:46, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

@Dan Harkless: It's populated because |B-Class-4=yes isn't set. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:26, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
@Redrose64: I see. So, expanding the "has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status" field on its Talk page, I see that the "needing attention to grammar" isn't saying that there are problems with the grammar, just that it hasn't been assessed yet. Somewhat misleading category name. Thanks much; the article rating system isn't something I've looked at very much. --Dan Harkless (talk) 07:09, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
The same thing can happen for any of the other five B-Class criteria. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 06:05, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I gathered – just wasn't familiar with that use of the terminology until now. Thanks again. --Dan Harkless (talk) 12:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

RfC on Brooklyn perpetual stew

There is currently an RfC on whether the perpetual stew article should include a brief mention of a perpetual stew that is currently being made and served in Brooklyn, New York. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:15, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Masala chai#Requested move 22 June 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Masala chai#Requested move 22 June 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 23:26, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

FAR

I have nominated Cracker Barrel for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Michelin Guide task force?

Would any editors be interested in contributing to a task force specifically for the Michelin Guide and Michelin-starred restaurants? ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:47, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Credibility bot

As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej (talk) 18:10, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

List of dive bars at AfD

AfD: List of dive bars

---Another Believer (Talk) 13:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Importance ranking at Pitaya

A question has been raised at Talk:Pitaya#Importance ranking about this project ranking the importance of the acticle as "Top". Donald Albury 14:39, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Achillea millefolium#Requested move 24 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Achillea millefolium#Requested move 24 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 03:49, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Mashed potato, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 28 August 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Requested move at Talk:TikTok food trends#Requested move 26 August 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:TikTok food trends#Requested move 26 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Lightoil (talk) 10:40, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Juice, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 18 September 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

50 best restaurants in the U.S., The New York Times

New stubs:

---Another Believer (Talk) 13:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

ADM Dwayne Andreas section

Hi there, I'm a representative of ADM and I've been posting on the ADM Talk page about potential edits to the article's History section. I've got a new request posted about adding a Dwayne Andreas subsection. Because I have a clear COI, I want to ensure that any changes to the article reflect clear community consensus. As such, I wanted to reach out to relevant WikiProjects to see if members could review my suggestions and offer feedback. Any thoughts or suggestions you can provide would be greatly appreciated. ADMDane (talk) 17:19, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Question for the Wikipedian's on this Project

What has been the most rewarding impact since you began editing the Wikiproject Food and Drink?

--Strawberryshortcake10 (talk) 18:24, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Limpa#Requested move 13 September 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Limpa#Requested move 13 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Lightoil (talk) 14:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Moin moin

If any of you know a bit about West African food, please have a look at that article. There's been some edit warring of a parochial nature, and the article suffers from a lack of proper secondary sources. Thank you so much, Drmies (talk) 20:05, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Eruca vesicaria#Requested move 18 September 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Eruca vesicaria#Requested move 18 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:10, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

New article on Food Deserts in the US

In order to address the inconsistencies in information (such as the proposed causes of food deserts) and lack of a global perspective on food deserts in the parent article "Food Deserts", I would like to revise the parent article to include more global theories and definitions of food deserts that address food deserts as a global issue without implying it is a problem in every country. Likewise, I’d like to create a new article on food deserts in the US, and move a majority of the content in the current version of the parent article over into the new article. Within the new article, I plan to add to the “History” section of the article to outline the proposed theories on how food deserts emerged in the US as a result of systemic inequalities and unfair policies. There are also some more minor edits I’d like to make to the existing article’s content. Please let me know if you all have any suggestions, comments, questions, or concerns. Cd631874 (talk) 21:06, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Restaurants by cuisine categories

There are a couple entries at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 14, if any project members want to participate in discussions about how Wikipedia should categorize restaurants by cuisine type (or, ethnicity?) Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:55, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Merge WP:Wine into WPFOOD

An editor has requested that Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine be moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Wines task force, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. -- 65.92.244.127 (talk) 08:46, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Merge WP:Bacon into WPFOOD

An editor has requested that Wikipedia:WikiProject Bacon be moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Bacon task force, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. -- 65.92.244.127 (talk) 08:46, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Merge WP:Breakfast into WPFOOD

An editor has requested that Wikipedia:WikiProject Breakfast be moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Breackfast task force, which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You are invited to participate in the move discussion. -- 65.92.244.127 (talk) 08:46, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for merger of Template:WikiProject Bacon

Template:WikiProject Bacon has been nominated for merging with Template:WikiProject Food and drink. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. 65.92.244.127 (talk) 05:27, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for merger of Template:WikiProject Breakfast

Template:WikiProject Breakfast has been nominated for merging with Template:WikiProject Food and drink. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. 65.92.244.127 (talk) 05:27, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Boxer Ramen#Requested move 13 December 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Boxer Ramen#Requested move 13 December 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Lightoil (talk) 10:23, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Aquarius (beverage)#Requested move 21 December 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Aquarius (beverage)#Requested move 21 December 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —Alalch E. 00:01, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

B-checklist in project template

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council § Determining the future of B-class checklists. This project is being notified since it is one of the 82 WikiProjects that opted-in to support B-checklists (B1-B6) in your project banner. DFlhb (talk) 11:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Sheet pan dinner

I can't find an article about the Sheet pan dinner. Am I searching under the wrong name? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:58, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Since there is an article for sheet pan, I don't think a separate article is necessary (mainly since a sheet pan is a utensil for cooking, and using a sheet pan doesn't affect the dish itself, it is merely a part of the process.) Hope this helps! UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI (talk) 21:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Sheet pan dinners seem to have become "a thing" in recent years. It's more like a cooking technique than a utensil. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
I just see it working better as a section in sheet pan. (Maybe a section about the media trend itself, but I don't see otherwise why it's needed. For example, you don't need an article for "purpose of the head of a hammer", you just put a section for it (here)). Best regards, UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI (talk) 07:02, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Fish slice (kitchen utensil), which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 1 January 2024 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Requested move at Talk:Baozi#Requested move 8 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Baozi#Requested move 8 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 20:35, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Request to edit Cultural references of Dunking (biscuit)

There's a long-standing discussion with another editor on the presence and content/format of this section. They find it poorly written and simply delete it without an attempt to improve it or request an edit. I am not the author and do not feel qualified to improve it. However, I find those references useful for finding the article through wiki-links and comprehending the popularity of the custom. Can someone help with upgrading the article to Wikipedia's policies and/or other editor's liking? (George6996 (talk) 23:03, 1 January 2024 (UTC))

Cooking Equipment

What if we created an entire section dedicated to breaking down cooking equipment and what they are individually used for?--MorganH2024 (talk) 04:54, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Saucepan

Can you believe we have no article on the saucepan, one of the most basic pieces of cooking equipment? I have started a draft at Draft:Saucepan. More expert eyes are welcome. Cheers! BD2412 T 21:30, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello,
I don't know how to help but I could help with sauce pan materials. The non-stick remark was very thoughtful.
Also good cooks don't use synthetic materials often.
I typed a similar response somewhere else. I'm a newbie. Deanprine (talk) 21:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Spiced rice

Article says this is an Indian/Asian dish. Which it true, but it's also a dish found elsewhere under that name. Not sure what to do about this. Doug Weller talk 08:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

James Beard Awards nominations

--Another Believer (Talk) 18:04, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Tortilla Soup

I apologize if this is trivial, this is the first time I'm doing anything related to editing wikipedia. The top image in the article for Tortilla Soup, captioned "A bowl of tortilla soup with all of the garnishes", is a tortilla soup apparently having been made with crushed Tostitos rather than fried tortilla strips, as you would normally see in a traditional bowl of tortilla soup. Surely it would be possible to change the image to one that better represents the soup instead of one that doesn't even have a working link back to its original recipe? Concord1337 (talk) 22:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

2023 Starbucks strike at AfD

---Another Believer (Talk) 16:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Pâté, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Rigatoni, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 12 February 2024 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

James Morton (baker) nominated for deletion

Link: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Morton (baker). George Ho (talk) 23:50, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Manago Hotel Help

As I am interested in the James Beard America's Classics, I created a draft for one of the 2023 winners here. It was declined due to an issue with the cuisine section, which I have addressed. Just wanted a second opinion on how this could be addressed. Rafaelquint99 (talk) 01:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Moved to main space. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Green tea ice cream#Requested move 28 February 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Green tea ice cream#Requested move 28 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:12, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

"Glazed ham" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Glazed ham has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 13 § Glazed ham until a consensus is reached. Thryduulf (talk) 00:35, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Maltodextrin

Maltodextrin has been given an overhaul, but remains a topic likely difficult for the general user to "digest". An IP editor has contributed substantially to the article, and raised several comments of interest on the talk page. Please scrutinize the article for content and organization, which was chosen purposely to separate different ingredients having the same name. For the encyclopedia, this is a topic in an ingredient category that resists clarity. Thanks. Zefr (talk) 02:53, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Question at Talk:Le Bernardin

I have a question I posed about the now outdated 2016 exposé on Kobe/wagyu beef, which is still in the article. I don't know whether it should remain in the article (they seem not to have served either in over 4 years), and if so is it currently in the right section or location (now in the "Menu and dining" section). No one seems to be watching the article so I'm posting here. Please see Talk:Le Bernardin#Should the text about Kobe/wagyu beef remain in the article?. Persingo (talk) 07:16, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Sambucus#Requested move 29 February 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sambucus#Requested move 29 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Gorilla (advertisement)

Gorilla (advertisement) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:37, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Feijoada (Brazilian dish)#Requested move 27 February 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Feijoada (Brazilian dish)#Requested move 27 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky (talk) 14:27, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Pringles

Hi. I have raised a question on the Talk page at Pringles regarding their description in the lead being changed. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 14:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Portal location

This group has always been strong about adding links to Portal:Food, and I wanted to post a general reminder that you should not create an empty ==See also== section just to stick a portal box in it. If there aren't any Wikipedia articles to list in WP:SEEALSO, then please put the portal links in another nearby section. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:19, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Mentioning (table) in sections about nutrition

The word "table" appears in parantheses in most sections about nutrition, for example in Sweet potato#Nutrition, Lettuce#Nutritional content, Apple#Nutrition. Sometimes the word "see" is also added, or even "(see adjacent nutrition table)", for example in Orange (fruit)#Nutrition and Chickpea#Nutrition. There are also some pages where it doesn't appear in the text, for example Butternut squash#Nutrition and Falafel#Nutrition. How many times this word appears is also inconsistent, sometimes it's only added after one sentence, sometimes after multiple ones.

To make the articles more consistent and helpful, I would like to establish a consistent style recommendation regarding this. My first intuition is that it isn't useful in most cases where the table is very close to the text, so I don't think it's worth mentioning it explicitly. In the exceptional cases where the table cannot be moved closer to the text of the nutrition section, I would recommend giving a bit more directional help - something like "(see table above/below)". This should only appear after the first sentence. What do you think, is this a good style recommendation, or do you have a different idea? Bendegúz Ács (talk) 21:31, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

We normally don't direct readers to tables, figures, images, etc. I agree with you that it should not be mentioned explicitly (unless there is some very unusual circumstance involved). WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Except for the USDA table used in most WP food articles discussing nutrient contents, reliable sources don't exist. The (table) serves the purpose of guiding a general non-science user to all the nutrient data available and the USDA source linked at the bottom of each table. Many nutrition sections also present a Daily Value reference for individual nutrients. Although the DV is US-centric, it is used as a reference for food labeling by other countries, and is a simple way of expressing individual nutrient contents that consumers see on food labels.
Over years, users have inserted a [citation needed] tag for a nutrient content of interest or used a food blog as a source with unreliable misleading content. There is no harm in simplifying a nutrition section with a (table) to guide general users to the USDA data and link. How it's shown or expressed are a matter of choice to an editor, requiring no need for standardization. Zefr (talk) 03:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
That makes sense, but I think it would be even better if we had an actual citation to the relevant USDA page, since I can easily imagine some people still thinking a reference is needed instead of the "(table)" text.
To make this easy, do you think it would be a good idea (assuming it's possible) to develop a new citation template that would simply take its content from the Template:Infobox nutritional value? It seems like Template:Infobox nutritional value could also use some improvements, so that the displayed "Source: USDA FoodData Central" link will redirect to the specific food item's page, rather than to the home page (for example, https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/169296/nutrients instead of https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/index.html). Bendegúz Ács (talk) 18:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
1) The template for the nutrition infobox calculates and displays the DV, whereas a direct ref to the USDA table provides raw nutrient data, a result of numbers likely having little meaning to most users. We should stay with the template - it is informative for all potential nutrients of interest, depending on how the template is filled out. Referring to it in the text or not is a simple editorial choice.
2) FoodData Central was revised from the main database in 2019 to provide direct links of nutrient data to specific foods, and is the preferred use for the template. Some articles may still retain the pre-2019 URL to the home page or former National Nutrient Database. This can be changed by editing the food-specific URL with copy/paste. Zefr (talk) 18:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

1. I understand and agree with your reasoning on why it's currently inferior to use a regular citation to the USDA website rather than directing users to the table. Based on this, my suggestion would be a new template that takes the user to the table when clicked and would be rendered as a citation. For example, this is the original Butternut squash#Nutrition:
Baked butternut squash is 88% water, 11% carbohydrates, 1% protein, and contains negligible fat (table). In a reference amount of 100 grams (3.5 oz), it supplies 167 kilojoules (40 kilocalories) of food energy, and is a rich source (20% or more of the Daily Value, DV) of vitamin A (70% DV), with moderate amounts of vitamin C (18% DV) and vitamin B6 (10% DV) (table).
And this would be with the new template:
Baked butternut squash is 88% water, 11% carbohydrates, 1% protein, and contains negligible fat.[table] In a reference amount of 100 grams (3.5 oz), it supplies 167 kilojoules (40 kilocalories) of food energy, and is a rich source (20% or more of the Daily Value, DV) of vitamin A (70% DV), with moderate amounts of vitamin C (18% DV) and vitamin B6 (10% DV).[table]
[table] would take the user to the "Butternut squash, baked" table, which will probably require inserting an {{anchor}} for nutritional value templates. What do you think, would this be an improvement?
2. Yes, the URL is there, but it has to be provided in the Note parameter, for example: [https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/169296/nutrients Link to USDA Database entry]. Instead, it would be more convinient, if only the ID (169296) or the URL would have to be provided and the same link (Link to USDA Database entry) would be rendered automatically.
Hankwang, Waddie96, Thumperward, Plastikspork, Primefac, Ans As significant contributors to the Template:Infobox nutritional value, do you have any opinion about these potential improvements? Bendegúz Ács (talk) 18:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

These suggestions would not be an improvement. In the current use of having a short nutrition description with the full nutrition table available, high-content nutrients are highlighted in the text, and low-content nutrients are displayed in the table, also providing useful, easy-to-see information as the %DV. For a food like spinach with diverse nutrients in rich, moderate and low contents, the description section would be unwieldy with citations. There is no problem with the current use of nutrient descriptions accompanied by a nutrition table, as has existed for many years. The proposal is a WP:AINTBROKE idea. Zefr (talk) 20:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
"the description section would be unwieldy with citations": My suggestion is to replace "(table)" with the citations, not to add citations after every sentence.
"There is no problem with the current use of nutrient descriptions accompanied by a nutrition table, as has existed for many years.": Again, I don't have any issues with the overall layout. The only problem is how one references the other.
"The proposal is a WP:AINTBROKE idea": Both WhatamIdoing and I find the "(table)" convention problematic, which constitutes the majority in this discussion, and all the inconsistencies I pointed out above support this as well. Bendegúz Ács (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
I’ve edited {{Infobox nutritional value}} so that a citation always appears at the bottom without having to specify a source, call for it manually by specifying a value for source_usda or source_USDA or source, unless noRDA is specified to suppress the message at the bottom. I would value your feedback. waddie96 ★ (talk) 21:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Great, thank you! Would it be a further improvement if the reference was pointing to the specific entry, rather than the home page of Food Data Central? For example, https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/169296/nutrients instead of https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/. Bendegúz Ács (talk) 22:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
At the bottom of each nutrition table is the statement "Link to USDA Database entry" which contains the specific FDC URL for the food, such as here for butternut squash. Having another link to the same FDC page is unnecessarily redundant. Zefr (talk) 22:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
In this case the "Link to USDA Database entry" would not be needed at all, and the "note" parameter could be used more appropriately - as its description says: "Any explanatory notes, e.g., which parts of the vegetable are edible". Bendegúz Ács (talk) 22:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm assuming your code was this: | source_USDA | source_usda | source | no_RDA | but do not see an example among several food nutrition tables how it is used when the specific FDC URL is already in place.
At the bottom of each nutrition table is the footnote: †Percentages estimated using US recommendations (the "DRI" for individual nutrients) for adults.[ref] where the ref goes to the FDC search page. That ref to the search page isn't useful because it is for food searching, not for DRI values. Zefr (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

With respect to a citation template that just links to an internal page anchor: I don't think that's a good idea. If you're going to use a citation template then you might as well use it to link to the FDA site itself. I dislike articles that seem to treat the concept of directing readers to the information they want as some sort of adventure. I do strongly agree that we should, however, just be using citations instead of self-referential things like "see table" which are both fragile and invalid in various contexts. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 06:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply! There was an argument above that the problem with citations is that the daily values are not stated/calculated in the original source, but they are in the table. Considering this, do you still think it's best to just use the citations overall? Bendegúz Ács (talk) 18:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
If the data is in the table, it has to be coming from somewhere. We should just link to whatever that source is directly. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
The % daily values (%DV) are calculated from the nutrition content of the specific food, and the recommended daily value. Both of them can be sourced, but only separately, meaning the calculated % value doesn't show up on any reliable reference, it is only calculated by the table. For example, considering the calcium content of butternut squash: it contains 41 mg ([1]) and the recommended daily value is 1300 mg ([2]), so the %DV is . The table calculates this automatically.
With this in mind, do you think referencing the nutrition content (e.g. [3]) is enough when mentining the %DV in the text (e.g. 3%)? Bendegúz Ács (talk) 17:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Undo food and drink categorization on Jonah Crab article?

I was looking at the Jonah Crab talk page and I noticed that it has the food and drink categorization. I will research how to undo, but I don't truly know if it is a mistake or if it is a commonly eaten crab in some cultures, but this is probably a mistake. Edit, I fucked up. Sorry. how to delete? 2abc3 (talk) 19:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Is being a female winemaker "defining"?

Comments please (and ideally sources) at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_March_18#Category:American_female_winemakers. Johnbod (talk) 01:34, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

This was relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 March 26#Category:American female winemakers and eventually ended up being kept. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:35, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Notability guidelines for food items

Hello everyone, I think we need to make it more clear that recipes are not suitable sources for food articles. I've nominated several different food articles (mainly cakes and salads) that have absolutely no notability and still have to explain to editors that the existence of recipes for a food doesn't make that specific food notable. Can we work on an essay or something to put this into writing somewhere? BaduFerreira (talk) 02:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it will help, because WP:Nobody reads the directions.
But if you want to move in that direction, you'd probably need to spell out exactly what counts as "a recipe" and what doesn't. Otherwise, some editors will say "Those four paragraphs of text explaining the history and cultural significance of this dish are part of 'the recipe' and don't count towards notability" and others will take the opposite extreme, and you'll really be no better off than you are now. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
I would support having this as a guideline/essay, but similarly to what @WhatamIdoing mentioned, I also feel like the distinction would be difficult to make. For example, I recently used this source: [4]. This page contains an introductory text and a recipe - how should we decide if pages like this are okay?
Another concern I have is what reliable sources can be used for articles in this Wikiproject if no recipes are allowed. There might be some reliable books on cuisines and similar cooking/food-related topics that are not just a collection of recipes, but I suspect the majority of editors don't have access to those.
One idea is that we might want to allow recipes for certain content, but not for all. For example, they could be insufficient to establish notability.
Overall, I feel like what we're missing is not just a guideline/essay for avoiding recipes, but a more comprehensive one that explains what sources to use for articles about food and drink, where WP:RS might be especially hard to satisfy. Bendegúz Ács (talk) 20:59, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Beginning on your account's six-month anniversary, you'll be able to log in to Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library and find some great sources. I suggest starting by finding the "Oxford Reference" series in the list of resources. Click on that to access the collection, which has some great encyclopedias about food and drink. Then search for the name of the article you're working on.
Speaking of simple rules of thumb for notability, if there's an entry in any of their food/drink encyclopedias, that should probably be taken as proof of notability by itself. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Honestly, I don't see any issue with that source. The Guardian is a reliable publisher and that source is written by a seemingly notable food critic Joanna Blythman. My issue with using recipes as sources are the overwhelming amount of recipes that are hosted on personal blogs that I've found used as sources for Wikipedia articles. For example, I recently came across Cassava cake and Bánh khoai mì which suffer from this issue of using personal blog recipes for the bulk of their article content. I won't be nominating these for deletion as I don't have the cultural or linguistic background to properly gauge whether these specific dishes are notable, but it does worry me that we potentially have thousands of articles that suffer from this issue of improper sourcing potentially lending undeserved notability. BaduFerreira (talk) 01:12, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
I think generally we need to consider what is really a distinct food product and what is a variation of something else. Many of the articles you've nominated already fell into a particular concept but just used particular ingredients in a particular way, so the difference could be easily covered in another article. Other examples I've merged are Seafood cocktail and Escabeche oriental. About recipes, we need to consider if it's from a journalistic source with an edited description or something out of a cookbook, whether the food is a specific and widely identifiable or closely related to a broader concept. Reywas92Talk 21:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I've noticed a number of separate articles that just need someone to boldly merge them into Nut roll. The specific content usually amounts to a nut roll, but the editor's grandmother was from a different country, so it has a different name and perhaps a variation of one or two ingredients. I expect that's true for many others. There's no value in deleting them; they just need Wikipedia:Merging. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:46, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I agree with your assessment of what a proper recipe-containing source is. Ultimately, this is just a matter of WP:GNG. Reliable sources that speak in-depth about a specific dish or meal and contain a recipe are fine, whereas "sources" that are hosted on someone's blog about how to bake some specific cake or prepare some stew are not. BaduFerreira (talk) 01:16, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Personal blogs are generally not reliable, unless they meet the exceptions outlined in WP:SPS.
However, WP:NEXIST says that what matters is whether the real world has the sources (newspapers, magazines, books, academic journals...), and not whether the current version of the Wikipedia article cites sources that demonstrate notability. When you see a Wikipedia article sourced entirely to personal blogs, that may be annoying, but it doesn't tell us anything about whether the subject is notable. Unfortunately, for foods, a useful WP:BEFORE search sometimes requires some specialized knowledge. A simple web search usually produces lots of unreliable (or just useless) sources. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

New list of lists

Improvements welcome! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Why not a navigation template? The Banner talk 15:23, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Some of these are already linked at Michelin_Guide#Guides. I'd suggest adding any missing and redirecting. Reywas92Talk 22:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Food_and_drink/Archive_43&oldid=1236194638"