No edit summary |
|||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
::::::For example, there's a massive SO-WHAT? entry: |
::::::For example, there's a massive SO-WHAT? entry: |
||
::::::'Charles Hodgkins begins gathering data from 170 taquerias in San Francisco for Burritoeater.com' How is this entry significant to the history of the burrito? The results of this search MIGHT present notable facts, but stating that start of the search itself is notable is very silly. <span style="color:Purple">—</span> '''[[User:Fcsuper|<span style="color:#006699">f</span><span style="color:#6666FF">c</span><span style="color:#666699">s</span><span style="color:#336633">u</span><span style="color:#006699">p</span><span style="color:#6633FF">e</span><span style="color:#9966FF">r</span>]]'''<sup> ([[:User talk:Fcsuper|<span style="color:Olive">How's That?</span>]], [[Special:Contributions/Fcsuper|<span style="color:Teal">That's How!</span>]])</sup> <sub>([http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Exclusionism <span style="color:Maroon">Exclusionistic</span>] [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Immediatism <span style="color:Red">Immediatist</span>] ) </sub><span style="color:Purple">—</span> 17:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
::::::'Charles Hodgkins begins gathering data from 170 taquerias in San Francisco for Burritoeater.com' How is this entry significant to the history of the burrito? The results of this search MIGHT present notable facts, but stating that start of the search itself is notable is very silly. <span style="color:Purple">—</span> '''[[User:Fcsuper|<span style="color:#006699">f</span><span style="color:#6666FF">c</span><span style="color:#666699">s</span><span style="color:#336633">u</span><span style="color:#006699">p</span><span style="color:#6633FF">e</span><span style="color:#9966FF">r</span>]]'''<sup> ([[:User talk:Fcsuper|<span style="color:Olive">How's That?</span>]], [[Special:Contributions/Fcsuper|<span style="color:Teal">That's How!</span>]])</sup> <sub>([http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Exclusionism <span style="color:Maroon">Exclusionistic</span>] [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Immediatism <span style="color:Red">Immediatist</span>] ) </sub><span style="color:Purple">—</span> 17:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
||
:::::::Charles Hodgkins is a notable food writer from California, who is employed by the [[California Culinary Academy]]. He is also the creator of burritoeater.com, whose data he used to publish in the ''San Francisco Bay Guardian'' and ''Synthesis'', and whose efforts were covered by ''San Francisco Chronicle'' (4/2/06), ''The New York Times'' (11/14/05), ''The Los Angeles Times'' (1/4/06), ''Gelf Magazine'' (2/22/06), in addition to others. International travel guide publisher [[Rough Guides]] has also published or mentioned his work. Lonely Planet's ''California Trips'' also mentions his achievements as a burrito expert on four separate pages.[http://books.google.com/books?id=W0DdKx5nJiYC&dq=] [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 19:20, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
I think I'm tending to agree with fcsuper on this. There's nothing to show why most of the entries here are part of the burrito's history. Was Restaurant Xochimilco the first restaurant to offer a burrito? To call it a burrito? To bring it to a wider audience? All a reader knows is that some restaurant opened in Sonora - there's no context. And that's true for most of the entries. "Anna's Taqueria opens in Brookline, MA"? Who cares? Was it the first burrito-selling place in New England? The first chain restaurant? You get the picture. I understand the difficulty in reliably sourcing a non-academic topic like the burrito, but there at least needs to be context and some notability to put something in the timeline. I'd support the removal of non-notable entries, adding context to others where appropriate, and depending on how much is left, merging the rest to the main burrito page (which does need help in the history section). [[User:Dohn joe|Dohn joe]] ([[User talk:Dohn joe|talk]]) 19:10, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
I think I'm tending to agree with fcsuper on this. There's nothing to show why most of the entries here are part of the burrito's history. Was Restaurant Xochimilco the first restaurant to offer a burrito? To call it a burrito? To bring it to a wider audience? All a reader knows is that some restaurant opened in Sonora - there's no context. And that's true for most of the entries. "Anna's Taqueria opens in Brookline, MA"? Who cares? Was it the first burrito-selling place in New England? The first chain restaurant? You get the picture. I understand the difficulty in reliably sourcing a non-academic topic like the burrito, but there at least needs to be context and some notability to put something in the timeline. I'd support the removal of non-notable entries, adding context to others where appropriate, and depending on how much is left, merging the rest to the main burrito page (which does need help in the history section). [[User:Dohn joe|Dohn joe]] ([[User talk:Dohn joe|talk]]) 19:10, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
||
:It's possible that there is an entry or two that were added by someone unfamiliar with inclusion criteria, by many of this stuff is already referenced and notable. I'll remove non-notable items as I find them, but many of the examples Fcsuper and yourself offer above (El Cholo and Restaurant Xochimilco) have been covered in RS, for example by notable food historian Andrew F. Smith and writer Peter Fox. [[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] ([[User talk:Viriditas|talk]]) 19:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== Merge discussion == |
== Merge discussion == |
Revision as of 19:26, 10 November 2010
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Burro meat
This newspaper article from 1917 claims burro meat was "toothsome and succulent". --Dwchin (talk) 09:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Some of the bullets in this article defy notability
It might seem to some that several of the items on the time line defy creditable notibility. Just because something makes it into a local newspaper doesn't mean it's a notable member of this timeline. I would like to suggest a review of the items on this article with an eye to important events. — fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 20:07, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
- The entire 2007 list of entries to start with.
- Mar: Chipotle Mexican Grill starts "Don't Stand in Line " online burrito ordering system[22]
- Jun: Ryan Goff gets prison term for Taco Bell burrito extortion"[23][24]
- Jul 29: Moe's Southwest Grill (FL) starts annual competitive burrito eating contest[25]
- Rosemary Gonzales arrested for smuggling drugs inside Taco Bell burrito
- Burritophile.com launches
- Freebirds World Burrito (TX) starts online orders
- etc etc etc. That's just the 21st century entries. The fact that this article is so heavily loaded with this nonsense tempts me to tag it as AfD. — fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 22:44, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
- It is not nonsense, but someone got carried away and added non-notable data points. Please remove them. Viriditas (talk) 23:34, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
- Mission begun...more edits to come. Going to let it rest for a week or so to let everyone else interested in this article catch up with the changes. — fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 19:47, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
- It is not nonsense, but someone got carried away and added non-notable data points. Please remove them. Viriditas (talk) 23:34, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
- ===Questionable items===
- Can someone comment with sources that show how these items are relevent to Timeline of the burrito?
- 1923 Alejandro Borquez opens Sonora cafe in Los Angeles (later renamed El Cholo Spanish Cafe) burrito on the menu is listed as being introduced in 1977
- 1934 Restaurente del Bol Corona opens in Tijuana, Mexico.
- 1949 Restaurant Xochimilco opens in Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico
- 1965 Mi Rancho market sells burritos in the deli in SF
- 1973 La Taqueria opens in SF
- These are just resturants. I've not found any link for their notable contribution to the burrito history.
- — fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 20:11, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I disagree with many of your deletions. "These are just restaurants" is not a reason to delete them. They are notable in history of the cuisine of California, in this case, burritos. These restaurants are in fact notable, and I'm restoring the entries. You cannot have a "history of the burrito" without these entries, so I'm a bit confused by your argument for removal. Judging by your comments, you seem to be taking exception with the lack of context since you don't see how they are important to the history of the burrito. In that case, the entries require expansion, not deletion. I hope you understand this point. In other words, just because you don't understand why they are important, doesn't mean they require deletion, just the opposite in fact. Viriditas (talk) 07:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- It is obvious that I didn't make these edits right away. I appreciate your entry into this disucssion now. As noted above, the question has been open for awhile, so I acted on it in good faith without any further input at the time. However, the fact that I cannot determine the notability is representative that someone else not familiar with the subject will not be able to either. We should work to establish notability quickly, otherwise, I'm not sure that many of these entries have any value. I ask for creditable sources. Menus from a resturant not creditable. The number one question I have for the 1923 item is this: Why is the fact that this resturant's opening and serving burritos notable? If this can be answered in the main burrito article, then maybe we can link to that location within the entry? — fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 16:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I disagree with many of your deletions. "These are just restaurants" is not a reason to delete them. They are notable in history of the cuisine of California, in this case, burritos. These restaurants are in fact notable, and I'm restoring the entries. You cannot have a "history of the burrito" without these entries, so I'm a bit confused by your argument for removal. Judging by your comments, you seem to be taking exception with the lack of context since you don't see how they are important to the history of the burrito. In that case, the entries require expansion, not deletion. I hope you understand this point. In other words, just because you don't understand why they are important, doesn't mean they require deletion, just the opposite in fact. Viriditas (talk) 07:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Additionally, I will continue to say that local events are note notable enough for any timeline. The fact that a burrito was made in honor of Elvis is completely unnotable for wikipedia since anyone can do this at any time. It doesn't really matter if the story made a local paper. Its a bit like having articles on local bands or the results of local senior shuffle board leagues. So, these items need to be seriously reconsideration. I will repeat my earlier statement in different words. There's a lot of fluff in this article that just doesn't belong on wikipedia. — fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 17:05, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- For example, there's a massive SO-WHAT? entry:
- 'Charles Hodgkins begins gathering data from 170 taquerias in San Francisco for Burritoeater.com' How is this entry significant to the history of the burrito? The results of this search MIGHT present notable facts, but stating that start of the search itself is notable is very silly. — fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 17:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Charles Hodgkins is a notable food writer from California, who is employed by the California Culinary Academy. He is also the creator of burritoeater.com, whose data he used to publish in the San Francisco Bay Guardian and Synthesis, and whose efforts were covered by San Francisco Chronicle (4/2/06), The New York Times (11/14/05), The Los Angeles Times (1/4/06), Gelf Magazine (2/22/06), in addition to others. International travel guide publisher Rough Guides has also published or mentioned his work. Lonely Planet's California Trips also mentions his achievements as a burrito expert on four separate pages.[1] Viriditas (talk) 19:20, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
I think I'm tending to agree with fcsuper on this. There's nothing to show why most of the entries here are part of the burrito's history. Was Restaurant Xochimilco the first restaurant to offer a burrito? To call it a burrito? To bring it to a wider audience? All a reader knows is that some restaurant opened in Sonora - there's no context. And that's true for most of the entries. "Anna's Taqueria opens in Brookline, MA"? Who cares? Was it the first burrito-selling place in New England? The first chain restaurant? You get the picture. I understand the difficulty in reliably sourcing a non-academic topic like the burrito, but there at least needs to be context and some notability to put something in the timeline. I'd support the removal of non-notable entries, adding context to others where appropriate, and depending on how much is left, merging the rest to the main burrito page (which does need help in the history section). Dohn joe (talk) 19:10, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- It's possible that there is an entry or two that were added by someone unfamiliar with inclusion criteria, by many of this stuff is already referenced and notable. I'll remove non-notable items as I find them, but many of the examples Fcsuper and yourself offer above (El Cholo and Restaurant Xochimilco) have been covered in RS, for example by notable food historian Andrew F. Smith and writer Peter Fox. Viriditas (talk) 19:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Merge discussion
I've placed a merge tag on this article with the intent of merging the history data points into the prose section of Burrito#History. This does not mean this article should not exist, but rather it encourages editors to develop the history section in the burrito article and then redirect this article if it is no longer needed. Viriditas (talk) 09:31, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Notability of many of the entries on the Timeline of the burrito has not been fully established. May facts have no sources, many of the sources either do not support the entry, and many other sources are simply not creditable. A merger would be premature if it means that these entries should be moved over to the Burrito article wholesale. — fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) — 17:18, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
- Many, if not all of these facts have sources (and are already used in the article as references). There's a big difference between "not having sources" and not having a citation tag at the end of every sentence. A merger request is not "premature"; it is a way of encouraging editors to roll up their sleeves and write some prose. Are you interested in helping write the history section? Viriditas (talk) 19:00, 10 November 2010 (UTC)