Talk:In Defense of Food: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 21:09, 3 February 2024

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Food and drink

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

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

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

What are "glittering generalities"? --Robert Daeley (talk) 09:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering the same thing and removed the comment. Jasonid (talk) 04:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Critical review

What is the importance of "The book drew a critical review from James E. McWilliams"? I am sure lots of books and articles get lots of critical reviews, but I am unsure why this deserves mention. There must be other reviews out there and I don't understand why this one was singled out. Who is J. McWilliams and who cares (my apologies) about the Texas Observer? This seems very much like a personal plug to me. Receptacle (talk) 23:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Receiving a critical review is not really news, especially for a #1 bestseller. The mention draws too munch undeserved attention to the review and not the book, which is supposed to be the subject of this article. I removed the mention from the main text and added the link to the External Links section if anyone's interested. Doomsdayer520 (Talk|Contribs) 08:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{WPBooks|class=start}}
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|
+{{WikiProject Books}}
+{{WikiProject Food and drink}}
+}}
 ----
@@ Line 10: / Line 13: @@
 ==Critical review==
 What is the importance of "The book drew a critical review from James E. McWilliams"?  I am sure lots of books and articles get lots of critical reviews, but I am unsure why this deserves mention. There must be other reviews out there and I don't understand why this one was singled out.  Who is J. McWilliams and who cares (my apologies) about the Texas Observer?  This seems very much like a personal plug to me. [[User:Receptacle|Receptacle]] ([[User talk:Receptacle|talk]]) 23:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
+: I agree. Receiving a critical review is not really news, especially for a #1 bestseller. The mention draws too munch undeserved attention to the review and not the book, which is supposed to be the subject of this article. I removed the mention from the main text and added the link to the External Links section if anyone's interested. <span style="font-family:Footlight MT Light;">[[User:Doomsdayer520|Doomsdayer520]] ([[User Talk: Doomsdayer520|Talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Doomsdayer520|Contribs]])</span> 08:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)