Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Template and task list

I have modified the project template to contain the project task list. I have also added Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Food_and_drink to the task list. They are at Template:WikiProject Food and drink and Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Tasks. Not 100% happy with the color, but it works. Please make any appropriate aesthetic changes. Cheers! JohnnyMrNinja 10:19, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I have moved the task list to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/to do to work with {{todo}} (visible above). JohnnyMrNinja 09:14, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

New Articles

I am not a member of this Wikiproject, but I went ahead and add Cozy Dog Drive-in to the list of new articles. Hope that is okay. :) <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 07:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

That's perfectly fine, I'm sure we all appreciate it. It is not necessary to have your name on the list in order to contribute to the project.--Chef Tanner (talk) 14:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Butter

Butter has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Re-Assesment

I was wanting to know if someone would like to re-asses Cozy Dog Drive-in. I am trying to get this to WP:DYK and need to work on it to make it not a stub so it can pass the criteria. If you feel changes need to be made to make it a Start or better, list'em here and I will try and work them out. :). <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 06:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

You've already done it. Is it over the word count yet? Cool choice BTW. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I am fairly certain I am over character count. I checked it when I was first writing it. But I made several changes to it (mostly adding) so I think I'm fine. Thanks :). <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 07:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Please note, I also added Corn dog to the New Articles list :) <3 Tinkleheimer TALK!! 07:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Assessed, per request. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 15:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Assesments

Hello all,

I was running through and doing some assessments on outstanding (as in past due) articles.

Here is what I got done:

• Tagged templates as {{WikiProject Food and drink|class=template |importance=NA}}
• Tagged most of the food-related categories as {{WikiProject Food and drink| class=Category| importance=NA}}
• Tagged some disambiguation pages as {{WikiProject Food and drink| class=Dab |importance=NA}}
• Reassessed Asian soups as a {{WikiProject Food and drink| class=List |importance=NA}}
• Finished off the letter "A"
• Categorized several templates for regional cuisine as Category:Cuisine by region templates

I also did some maintenance of some food related articles:

• Moved Asian soup to Asian soups
• Closed two merge proposals open since April with no comment, invited contributor to place any future proposals on the main page.
• put the {{WikiProject banner shell}} on any project that is associated with more than two WikiProjects.

What I need you to do:

• Tag any food related page as such with our WikiProject Banner.
  • Classify disambiguation pages with:{{WikiProject Food and drink| class=Dab |importance=NA}}
  • Classify list pages with:{{WikiProject Food and drink| class=List |importance=NA}}
  • Classify templates with:{{WikiProject Food and drink| class=Template |importance=NA}}

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Couple of quick comments. As the assessment statistics table demonstrates, Lists are intended to be assessed for importance, not left at NA - you can meaningfully say that "List of cooking methods" is more important (and more urgent to get to FL) than say "List of Gabonese varieties of plantain". And to be honest, I'd let a bot do the grunt work, it's a waste of time doing it manually. If you don't mind waiting a couple of weeks (there's a bit of a queue), I'll set User:FlagBot on the job - the advantage of my bot over others is that in 90% of cases it can auto-assess the class. Which in turn makes life a whole lot easier, as you can usually assess importance without even looking at the article. Which saves time both on the download and stops you getting distracted into tweeaking the article..... If you can come up with a "clean" list of categories for it to set to work on in the meantime, that would be great - you've got to beware cats which sound as though they should be OK, but then you look at them and you find that most of the articles don't really belong in the Project for whatever reason, whether off-topic or better tagged with one of the sub-project banners. Another thing to do in the meantime is to get the articles already tagged by the Project assessed - I see it's crept up again. If you've not get yourself set up with WP:AWB and its assessment plugin, you should. And then there's always the Top Starts and High Stubs to keep chipping away at..... FlagSteward (talk) 19:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I got E-J done. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 09:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

brew - Looking for an article in relationship only to "brew" as with coffee

Is there one article that can be made like brew (coffee) or something? When FDA lists for acrylamide levels in ground vs brewed coffee, do they just mean coffee that has been dripped? why not say what the ground level is for mcdonalds coffee? of is it not possible? I know that talk pages are not for answering questions so please don't answer, just point me in the direction of an article that can answer these questions for me.

Image

<span style="position:absolute;top:-40px; left:-170px;z-index:-3">[[Image:Foodlogo2.svg|180px]]</span>

Would anyone be interested in using something like this on the project page, or this talk page, provided the image was modified (to remove the plate)? JohnnyMrNinja 08:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I was specifically showing the code when I posted this originally. If you'd like to see the image as I intended, please look in the top-left corner of the screen. The plate, however, would have to go. I thought it might be cool to use on project pages (and I see it's been adapted by the food service task force). JohnnyMrNinja 09:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Look here. Specifically at the Foodservice task force. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 01:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Bot tagging errors

Please list all tagging errors here:

• It has included dog food and guinea pigs. Perhaps it needs tweaking or at least a review of what it has done. Thanks Bob98133 (talk) 14:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC) Guinea pigs were included in several food categories, should be in agriculture. This project does not cover livestock.

Guinea pig certainly is a food in South America (as our article does state), so the comment above is inaccurate. Badagnani (talk) 15:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you for your tagging! But you should be a bit careful with subcats because Egging and Salvia miltiorrhiza got through. Removed Category:Eggs and Category:Herbs

• Another page that has been inappropriately tagged is Hot dog day, which is a festival and not really under the auspices of WPFOOD. --bdesham ★ 20:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Hot dog day seems relevant to WPFOOD to me. Badagnani (talk) 20:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

• Please add People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals to the list of false positives. --Allen3 ^talk 02:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Included in Category:Poultry, left note

  It was actually Category:Poultry farming, a category that describes issues related to raising poultry such as chick sexing, debeaking, and forced molting. Groups and individuals that have protested modern poultry farming techniques are also in the category. Just because a subject is related to the production of food does not mean that the subject is also about food. --Allen3 ^talk 13:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• I don't think Denatonium should have been tagged. I think it is toxic. Badagnani (talk) 06:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

It came from Category:Flavors. Remove the cat if neccessary -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 06:54, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Or Alum. How did all these chemicals get tagged? I think you should exercise the bot more gingerly as regards these toxic chemicals, which are not edible. Badagnani (talk) 06:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Astringent flavors ?? -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 06:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The thing is, the deeper we go into subcats, the more false positives--so it's best to tag those subcats by hand. "Flavors" is already tenuous, as not all flavors are due to foods (such as a "metallic" taste). Badagnani (talk) 06:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• Coconut jewelry and Palmwood shouldn't be tagged, as one cannot eat them. I think at this point, subcats should probably be done by hand. Badagnani (talk) 06:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Removed Category:Coconuts

• You wrongly tagged citron articles with Wiki project food or drink. The only food made of citron is Succade which should be under the project. The plant and its fruit is not a common food as is. Shoteh (talk) 21:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

• Bizzaria and Etrog (ritual) are of coarse not food related articles. Shoteh (talk) 22:01, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

• Tea tree oil is NOT a food or drink. It is actually toxic if ingested orally. Can you please change this? Shoteh (talk)

• The bot added the Food and drink banner to castor oil and I removed it. Castor oil has no uses as either a food or beverage. It is used in very small quantities as an additive in some foods, but the ingestion of significant amounts of castor oil causes diarrhea, dehydration, even death. It is used primarily as an industrial raw material. Silverchemist (talk) 23:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC) Removed Category:Vegtable oils

• The article on Dog Food has been tagged by the bot. Does this project's scope include pet food, or should I remove the tag? Watchsmart (talk) 06:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Per Jeremy's reply here, it seems pet food are not within the project's scope. I've undone the tagging for the pet food related articles.--Dodo bird (talk) 07:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• It tagged all the Faberge eggs by mistake! Gareth E Kegg (talk) 17:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC) Removed category:Eggs

• Fixed a mis-tag on Mike the Headless Chicken. · AndonicO ^Engage. 02:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Removed Category:Poultry.

• I have taken the tags off Talk:Bush lawyer (plant), Talk:Litsea, and Talk:Puriri. Not sure why the first two were tagged as food, but the third was in an inappropriate category Category:Cherries - there is a user who adds bizarre categories to New Zealand trees, this one wasn't picked up. Kāhuroa (talk) 04:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• Prunus sargentii is an ornamental cherry. Tagged by mistake.imars (talk) 06:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• Mr. Potato Head (somewhat questionably in Category: Potatoes) William Avery (talk) 07:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Removed Category:Potatoes

• Undid Great Famine (Ireland), also in Category: Potatoes. Scolaire (talk) 08:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Removed category:Potatoes

• Zebrafish inappropriately tagged, and I've reverted. No idea why. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 08:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

It is under a a category that should have been skipped. I will look into it later, sorry. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 09:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• Your bot tagged Crocodile oil, which is an ingredient in a skin balm and nothing to do with food or drink. Its not much to do with medicine either, but that's another matter. almost-instinct 12:10, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Why was it under this category Category:Dietary supplements ?? -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 12:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Good question. The answer being: because the page was set up by someone flogging the stuff and trying to look serious. Actually the whole article is nonsense in need of deletion almost-instinct 12:35, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• Your bot tagged Salvia divinorum, Legal status of Salvia divinorum, and Salvinorin A. Salvia divinorum is a plant that is consumed as a recreational drug for its hallucinogenic properties, and the mode of consumption is usually smoking it like marijuana, and other ways, but almost never eating it. Salvia divinorum has nothing to do whatsoever with food or drink, though it may be somewhat confused as it is a plant in the sage category, and because salvia officinalis is the name of the plant commonly known in cooking as sage. Likewise, salvinorin A, the pharmacologically active substance in Salvia divinorum, is unrelated to food and drink. Reswobslc (talk) 13:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
• Hi, the bot tagged Kenaf, which is not a food, but a fiber plant. Good luck with this big project!--Rocksanddirt (talk) 14:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
• The bot added redundant tags to nearly all WP:BEER projects, a child of F&D, making the tag redundant and therefore unnecessary. Please revert? – ClockworkSoul 16:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• The bot tagged hay, which people cannot eat, and neatsfoot oil, which is a leather conditioner. LOL! Silly bot! Montanabw^(talk) 02:49, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
• Gossypium hirsutum - The bot tagged this page which is technically a herb but it has no application to food or drink that I am aware of. It may have uses as a herbal remedy (medicine) but I am pretty sure that does not count. 89.240.32.122 (talk) 07:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
• Collagen- The bot tagged this, but it shouldn't have. Collagen is used for research, and I'm pretty sure there aren't culinary uses for it. Except for the fact that its a protein in animals, but by that logic you would tag electrons and red blood cells. If this was supposed to be tagged, I apologize. Justbobdanish (talk) 20:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Collagen is used in the production of gelatin. Probably the best way to go would be to tag gelatin but not collagen. – ClockworkSoul 21:00, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

• Chromium(III) sulfate - This has been wrongly added to the Food and drink section. Please see my comments at Talk:Chromium(III) sulfate. Biscuittin (talk) 20:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Bot tagging issues

Please list all issues here.

The bot just tagged the Vienna article, presumably because Vienna is in the Austrian wine regions category. But the Vienna article doesn't seem appropriate for WikiProject Food and drink, since that's hardly its main focus (and there's a separate Viennese cuisine article. Skimming through the huge category of tagged articles, there seem to be lots of false positives, such as Bananaphone. Seriously, what's the point of this robotagging, aside from spamming everyone with ads for your project? The point of including articles in a project is so that project participants can have a list of articles to pay attention to. But at this point, the list is so huge that it looks completely useless -- there are almost 18,000 articles there. Are the six members of the assessment task force going to be looking at all of them? Klausness (talk) 10:13, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The amazing high amount of foolishly mis-categorized articles is messing with my project. I apologize for this.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 10:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The article Chicken or the egg talks about the philosophical question, not food. 192.114.175.2 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 12:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Tagging for WP:FOOD

An user Badagnani had made a bot request for tagging articles with {{WPFOOD}} for articles in Category:Desserts by country here. It was completed by TinucherianBot and tagged 178 articles of the 385 that were checked. This is just FYI -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 07:23, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

On another request of Bot run on Category:Desserts and Category:Salads , 1091 new articles of the 2022 articles that were checked -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 13:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I also ran the WP 1.0 bot manually to update the stats for the project articles. Sorry.. More work for the assessment team :) -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 13:56, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Argh! You sir, must die now.

I have asked FlagSteward to run Flagbot to auto assess those articles that are part of Category:Restaurants for stubs and starts and tag them with the {{WPF}} (Food service task force) tag as well. After that is completed we can have it go through the other WPFood articles and get thoses assessed. Those article that are C-Class can then be gone through and appropriate comments be added on the Articlename/Comments sub pages so other contributors can know what needs to be done to bring them up to B-class.--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 16:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

It has begun. What was previously cut down to 250 unassessed articles has ballooned up again to six times that, and it is going to get worse.

I have altered the {{WPFOOD}} template to include a switch for the Foodservice Task force. Just put |Foodservice=yes on those articles that concern commercial food operations and equipment. I will ask FlagSteward to alter his bot accordingly. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 21:15, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

See:

This is what it will look like with the |nested=yes parameter:

I concur, it would be better if we can add this style template, but I'm still happy to see the articles added to the project although it means people need to help out with assessment. I should spend some time helping out with this soon when I have a bit more time.--Chef Tanner (talk) 23:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the banner

Hello,

I have recently further modified the {{WPFOOD}} banner so that it supports other food related WikiProjects. I did this to cut down on the number of banners that appear at the top of each article talk page, and let people see the relationship between our projects.

In order to keep this page free of the dozen or so examples, I have put the here.

As you can see, the projects are prominently displayed in the banner.

I am also looking into adding support for the Beer, Wine and Mixed Drink projects.

By adding these switches instead of adding separate banners for each project and task force will allow us to cut down on redundancies by having a single point of assessment. If the other projects wish, we can add assessments for that specific project that can be included in the single banner.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 23:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Looks awesome Jeremy, great work! Did you send a link to the other projects so that they can see them?--Chef Tanner (talk) 23:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep Jeremy ( Blah blah...)

Support for all Food projects have now been added. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 23:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

As the developer of the current WPMIX banner, I'd agree to using the new food portal template if the following things could be fixed/added:

1. Please correct our project name: Wikipedia:WikiProject Mixed Drinks (WP:MIX), not Wikiproject Cocktails. The name was officially changed 2.5 years ago, and personally, I'd like to see the old name die off completely.
2. We use two special assessments: MergeDel and Merged. Please look at the special wording in that template. These are important to our project, and it has greatly helped in reducing the number of speedy deletes against articles under our auspices. The MergeDel generates a special message that lets people know that the article has been tagged as such, requests a little time for someone to take action (which is rather spotty and something our project needs to make an effort to respond to more quickly), and categorizes the article in a special WikiProject category for follow-up. After the article has been merged, we change the talk-page status to Merged and setup a redirect on the article page. This is important for GFDL compliance, since many of our small articles get merged into larger lists or transwikied to Wikibooks. I've not been very active here, because I'm trying to help make that transwikiing process flow a little smoother on the Wikibooks side. Over zealous Wikipedia editors have done large scale "dump and runs" into Wikibooks in the past, and the Bartending Guide has suffered as a result. That is also why there is a Bartending Task Force as part of WP:MIX
3. Add Wikipedia:WikiProject Bartending (WP:BAR) to your template so that we can get bartending-related articles assessed in the same way and thus eliminate the need for two templates at once. :-)

Your efforts resulted in a great job, Jeremy! I never really did figure out how to get the whole bot-managed assessment thingy to work with the templates. --Willscrlt (Talk) 00:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

1. Done.
2. Will work on it.
3. Done.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

HappyMelon and I will be working on this to get the needs of all the projects and task forces fully supported. Meanwhile, please continue to use your existing banners. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 16:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Update

• Support for all projects is now up.
  • Support for the |nested = parameter is not fully supported on Wine, Beer, Mixed Drinks, Bartending and Herbs, but is forthcoming.
• Support for the Merge field was already included
• Support for the MergeDel is still forthcoming

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 17:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Is there a discussion about this change to sub-project banners anywhere that I can read? --JD554 (talk) 09:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Right now only this project and its two task forces are using it, the others have been notified of it. The Mixed Drink Project agreed to use it once we get all functionality included. I have mentioned to the Ice Cream Project that I would start changing it over to the new banner after I finish with the WPFood task forces, if no one from that project disagrees.

Beer, Wine and Soft Drinks have not ventured an opinion.

You are in the middle of the discussion BTW.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 09:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't see a consensus for this. The Bot policy states that there must be a consensus for the task. When did this bot get approved? Also when was the Beer Wikiproject asked about this? I can't see anything on their talk page. --JD554 (talk) 09:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The bot TinucherianBot is an approved bot for any generic wikiproject tagging.. See Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/TinucherianBot_3. -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 09:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I missed it, simple oversight with everything going on. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 09:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

So there is no consensus for these changes? I think you should get the discussion going in one place (this page makes sense) and invite all the sub-projects to make any comments here. Unless there's a clear consensus a major change like this shouldn't be made. --JD554 (talk) 09:48, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

We have only made the capability available to these other projects. No one is forcing them to use the new banner and I am seeking the opinions of those other projects before I even consider doing this. Look at the Ice Cream Project, I am seeking their input. I am being bold here, trying to get a hold on all foodie related articles.

As Daughter projects to this one, both tags can exist. There are examples of this on thousands of articles already, for example the Boston article which falls under the WP Massachusetts and WP Boston projects, same for Fl\Miami, CA\LA and NY\NY. The general consensus already states that having multiple banners from related projects on a single article is acceptable. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 10:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes I can see that you're now making it optional; that wasn't clear from your initial notice (diff). The way you originally instigated all this looked like you wanted to removed the sub-project banners and have them incorporated into this project's banner. --JD554 (talk) 10:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Beer banner

Hello, I'm from the beer project. Were we asked about the change that includes rolling our banner into yours? I can't seem to find that discussion, and I'm really rather opposed to it. Cheers! – ClockworkSoul 14:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Allow me to clarify: I'm not so much opposed to the idea as I am its implementation without notice to the project in quesion. Some notification of its development would have been far more appropriate than a simple notice of "oh, we did this for you" which came off as somewhat paternalistic. Furthermore, having a multiplicity of banners for a single project is untidy and unnecessary. I can see it causing more confusing than clarification, which entirely defeats their purpose. Second, this "blah=yes" notation is generally reserved for task forces of a larger project, and since the beer project is not a task force of Food, I'm not convinced that this change is appropriate. – ClockworkSoul 16:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

That was what I was doing, informing your group of the functionality that is incorporated in the template and asking if you would like to participate in the proposal. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 16:11, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

With respect, that's not how the notice reads. To paraphrase, you essentially stated that "I made this, and I would like you to use it. If you have questions, let me know". More appropriate would be "I'm considering making this change, what do you think?". The former is stepping on toes a little by making a statement rather than inviting discussion, while the latter would be doing quite the opposite. – ClockworkSoul 16:19, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

OK. I was just trying to be bold, and came across poorly. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 16:46, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Of course, but boldness has its limits. Between this change and the bot tagging all of the beer articles as the domain of F&D, this looks and feels like a hostile takeover. As an aside, I would like to point out that the beer project is several times the size of F&D. How do you propose to remedy this situation? – ClockworkSoul 16:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Jeremy is just trying to help get more people to work on these articles which are tagged for your project, as this project was the original and it also works on drinks. I was also the one who came in to help revamp the Beer Project main page as I am a member of both projects along with being a member of other related food and drink projects which have been off-shoots of this one. Not to be nit-picky, we have 86 members here and the Beer Project has about thirty more members and this project (before the current expansion) had over 5,000 articles while the beer project has 677 so it is not many times larger, BUT having 200+ members working on an article is better than 114 I would think as this would help attract other members from both projects to each others pages. The template is still a work in progress from what I can see, perhaps his wording was a little "off" and as I noted below and Jeremy agreed to, he is not implementing this banner until there is a consensus.--Chef Tanner (talk) 05:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the problem I have is that we have different philosophies regarding tagging. Tagging an article doesn't mean that it will necessarily get more attention and automatically be developed more quickly, because tagging quickly reaches a point of diminishing returns. Using your numbers (from before the expansion) you have 86 members and about 5,000 articles, for about 58 articles per editor. Over at Beer we have about 7 articles per editor, allowing us the ability to focus, which is the true purpose of wikiprojects in the first place. Really, this boils down to a question of the value of quantity, which I've learned by hard experience means very little. I would prose that instead of this approach we consider something that encourages collaboration, like a joint F&D projects discussion board and a joint article of the month. – ClockworkSoul 04:00, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Whatever comes of this issue, which I honestly am deferring to Jeremy as I know he has good intentions, but I haven't been intimately active in the process to know the issues with categories and all the other issues that are coming up, I would like to continue with us working together, which is why I am a member of all of the our subsidiary projects and which is why I also helped revise all of their main pages. I know Jeremy has the best intentions in mind for all of our projects, and he has not implemented the template into any project except for our own parent project for our task forces. I am sure he will wait until we can all discuss the right direction to go with all of this, even if it means abandoning the whole idea, which could be the ended result, but doesn't have to be if we can find a good purpose for this decision. I am glad that people are "voicing' their opinions, I just wish some of the "voices" weren't so accusatory when they could be more collaborative in nature. I like your idea (Clockwork) of a collaborative article amongst our projects, I think it is a wonderful idea actually. I will also agree with your statement of less articles per members as meaning there will be higher quality articles in the effort, but we both know that wasn't your original intention of your statement "the beer project is several times the size of F&D." We are all out for the same thing to make food and drink articles, whatever their realm assets to Wikipedia. Now, I am off for the night to enjoy my La Fin du Monde which I am sure you will appreciate, that is if you appreciate Belgian ales--Chef Tanner (talk) 05:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

It makes no sense to re-tag articles that are part of an active child project. If the beer (or wine) project had been inactive, then merging the projects and re-tagging would make sense. As it is, this effort was poorly handled and should be undone. --Thetrick (talk) 17:22, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I can see the good intent, but as ClockworkSoul and others have said this was approached way too quickly/offhandedly for the magnitude of change proposed. I'd suggest rewording the request and then notifying all the relevant groups of the proposal and discussing it until there's a fairly solid consensus. Same for the other recent massive-scale changes. It sounds like Christopher feels the same way, and I'm sure that everyone involved is making an effort toward a good resolution. --Daniel11 (talk) 04:00, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes Daniel11, we are trying, maybe it was a little bit too much taken on all at once and we we have to talk in different directions at the same time. Thanks for your understanding. I think Jeremy is doing a great thing for all of us and i think we can all figure out the issues in a calm manner. He doesn't, however, deserve to be accused of things such as attempting a "hostile takeover", he was just attempting to help Wikipedia and our projects.--Chef Tanner (talk) 05:30, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Let me clarify something I should have been more clear about. I wasn't literally accusing anybody of trying to take over our project, but trying to illustrate how these sets of actions could look as though that was the case. I doubt anybody really believed that such an attempt was underway. – ClockworkSoul 05:48, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I actually understand what you said, but in saying that you can get some people upset in the same way Jeremy upset you with his proposal in the wrong "voice".--Chef Tanner (talk) 06:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Well, that's perfectly fair. – ClockworkSoul 06:08, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I also object. While I welcome interproject collaboration, especially where there is a genuine cross-over, The Food and Drink project is one step removed from beer articles themselves - it is a parent project rather than a cross-over project, and so should interact with the project itself, and not directly with the articles. Beer is fairly specialised, and requires specialised interest and knowledge which a general project like Food and Drink would not posses. Depending on which route one wishes to follow, beer also comes under the Chemistry project as well as the Science project - and it would also be inappropriate for those projects to get directly involved in Narragansett Brewing Company for example. Some projects which are cross-overs and do sometimes have a shared interest are the Architecture Project, the Tourism Project, the Business Project, etc. The point of a project is that it is a body of people who have an interest in a topic and can therefore deal with issues that occur. WikiProject Beer directly oversees matters relating to beer, including brewing companies. Any matters relating to beer should come to WikiProject Beer and not to WikiProject Food and Drink. Having a Food and Drink tag on beer related articles would only confuse matters. SilkTork *^YES! 22:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

You would mean fermentation? The same chemical process used in making bread and yogurt, or dozens of other areas of food production. Any food by its very nature involves chemical processes, and could be in those projects as well. So there is significant overlap.

Imaging a student doing an article on fermentation for their food science class, are we to tell them that beer and bread have nothing to do with each other? How about a business student wanting to research food producers of San Francisco? Shall we tell them "Yeah, you can look at Ghirardelli Chocolate Company but you have to ignore Anchor Brewing Company."? Do we eliminate the information about the former snack foods division of Anheuser-Busch?

How about an article like Chris' Cuisine of the Thirteen Colonies. If there were a Cuisine of Ancient Egypt article, would we have to leave out the fact that bakers and brewers were the same people? As any archeologist would say "you find the bakery, you find the brewery."

My point is don't look at what your interests are, look at what the interests of the people who come to Wikipedia are.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 13:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

You make a good point when you say "don't look at what your interests are, look at what the interests of the people who come to Wikipedia are", and I couldn't agree more. This is exactly why we have separate Food and Drink and Beer projects, so that F&D can cross over in the general beer articles (beer, some or all of the beer styles, and perhaps even fermentation) and BEER can specialize more by working with all the above, as well as the breweries, beer glassware, lists of beers, and beer minutiae of all kinds (flavors?). I sincerely commend what you're trying to do, Jeremy, but tagging all beer articles as food articles as well isn't going to foster collaboration, it's just going to swamp F&D. The point of tagging articles is so that you take a look at the state of progress for the project and focus work where it is needed, but if you have more articles than you can even list, then it will have the exact opposite effect as your intended goal of fostering community as its resources are spread too thin and people drift away in the face of an overwhelming task. I've seen it happen to many projects in the past. Most projects approach this dilemma by forming task-forces and child projects, which works quite well, and to try to work in reverse is a recipe (no pun intended) for mediocrity. – ClockworkSoul 13:59, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The category system is not the same as the WikiProject system. Someone researching fermentation is led by our cat system to bread and beer - but when they get to bread and beer they should find that the information there is presented in a manner helpful to them, and that information is overlooked by a team of individuals who have a focused interest in the topic. The cats, infoboxes, and notability criteria we have developed are specific to Beer and do not overlap with Food & Drink. Cats and projects work in harmony, but do different things. The cat system does what you are suggesting. The project system ensures that when a reader arrives at a topic that the topic is presented appropriately. Tagging on article talkpages is designed partly to direct readers to a core team of topic specific editors who can assist with questions; partly to recruit extra assistance for the topic project; and partly to record the project's own assessment of the work needed for that article. Where a project crosses over with another project because of shared interest a dual tag is appropriate as a question may concern the beer a brewery company produces, the business plan of the brewery, or the architecture of the building - and a question about the beer as a drink is best addressed to the beer project. SilkTork *^YES! 15:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Just a quick pointer. There is an article on Ancient Egyptian cuisine.

Peter ^Isotalo 13:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Some thoughts

If a sibling project wants to use this merged banner, is there a way to keep their "To Do" list in there as well. WikiProject Wine has a To Do list just like WikiProject Food and Drink and I noticed only WikiProject Food and Drink's To Do list shows up. I would think that issues such as this might keep the Wine Project members from wanting to use this merged banner. I'll also add, I think we need to give them some time to respond, at least a week as many users are only on here sporadically during the summer, especially with the 4th of July weekend. There is obviously no problem with the Foodservice and Cheeses banner being incorporated now as they are task forces of this project, but those other projects will need some time particularly the Herbs and Spices and Ice Cream projects as they are active but the discussion pages aren't as active as most.--Chef Tanner (talk) 14:38, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't going to do any thing with them this week end, just notifying them of the changes possibilities. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 16:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I foresee the other projects having some of the same issues I am seeing here and on their pages. Is there a way to make their project appear on top of this projects banner, with a full text from their banner, as for many of the wine and beer project pages I see us as helping them out more than them helping us and I think it would alleviate some of the issues currently arising.--Chef Tanner (talk) 17:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Bot Tagging

Hello all!

With the help of Badaganani, We have had some botwork done.

• TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} and his TinucherianBot:

This bot has already tagged about 3000 articles with the {{WPFOOD}} tag and tomorrow will be going through the top level categories for food and beverages to get the rest. Because of the sheer size of the task it may take about 8-16 hours to run its course. Once it is done, I estimate somewhere between 12-15,000 articles will be placed under the auspices of this project.

• maelgwn - talk and his MaelgwnBot

This bot has begun to tag articles in the restaurant categories with the foodservice task force parameter. I will have him work on the Ice Cream WP next.

As stated, Happy‑melon has offered his help in getting the tag to support all ten projects.

• Check back with me later.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 16:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

• I don't actually keep statistics but about 2350 articles were tagged for the Foodservice taskforce. -- maelgwn - talk 23:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

• ummm as we used to say in Vermont, holy crow.--Chef Tanner (talk) 03:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Important note  : Jeremy had asked to tagg articles in Category:Foods and its subcategories... This is a huge effort that involves around 1500 categories and approx 24,000 unique articles. There might be wrong or misplaced cats in the subcat tree. I have collected all the subcats in Category:Foods and made this list . I want the members to carefully verify the entire list and remove ALL unwanted cats and give me a final go ahead. Then TinucherianBot will start tagging the articles in the approved categories...It is a pleasure working for this project -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 06:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I cleaned up the list and reduced it to 1256 categories... Please have a look -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 06:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I created a quick list at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/Exclude, about 122 categories in all. Any one else please take a look! --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 07:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you... I did further cleanup and made the final list. The bot is preparing the article list now -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 09:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

 Doing.... The bot, TinucherianBot is going to check and tag 16030 unique articles -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 09:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I dunno - this bot seems aggressive to me. It plonks FOOD AND DRINK project banners at the very top of every talk page, without regard for whether food and drink is really the major project for that particular topic, and then it enters a flamboyant discussion entry, highlighting food and drink by wikilinking it in the heading (contrary to guidelines), and warbling on about how this marvelous bot had done this thing and so on. It's just that there is a whole world out there that is not just FOOD AND DRINK. The bot is not even DOING anything - it just slaps food and drink advertisements all over the place without doing any actual assessment (which I would have thought was the real issue). Most projects offer some respect to articles, do the hard yards, and have someone one actually inspect articles before installing themselves all over the place. Sigh... maybe its just a bad dream... --Geronimo20 (talk) 13:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

This is part of a multi-point plan:

1. Tag all food and drink related related articles.
2. Tag the articles with their appropriate F&D related genre.
3. Remove redundant tags to cleanup the talk pages by minimizing the number of banners
4. Once all F&D related articles have been identified, begin auto assessments.
5. Once the starts and stubs have been identified and tagged, move on to the rest.

Just as a note, I have personally review over a 500 articles in the past month, mostly stubs and starts. After Badagnani had started tagging those articles that should be under the auspices of this project, I realized this is way beyond the scope of human eyes. That is why I developed the integrated banner, and started looking long and hard at what needs to be done. I am having the bots do this in simple steps to insure that mistakes are minimized. The bot owner is taking the extra step of leaving a summary on each and every page as to what we are doing so that we can get feedback that will let us know what step we will need to alter the way we go about this to insure this is done right.

Additionally, TinuCherian went through the list of 2000 categories and whittled it down by 25% or so before handing it off to me. I then whittled his list down by another 10% more to about 1350 categories to ensure minimum disruption and we are not tagging of articles unrelated to the field.

Please ask questions instead of assuming the worst. The bot is doing something, and that is just the first step. Would you like to help us? I think it would be more helpful that what you are doing now.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 17:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I concur with Jerem43 on the value of the tagging project, and let it be known that we have an active project, and the articles will indeed be rated and treated with tender loving care. I don't personally believe the order of banners for articles in multiple Projects is so important, but, if it is believed to be offensive, the position of the banners can easily be switched. Badagnani (talk) 18:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Why are sub-projects of WikiProject Food and Drink being tagged when they are already tagged for the sub-project? This is the Wikiproject equivalent of overcategorization. Is there a clear consensus for this? --JD554 (talk) 06:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Please see this information.. -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 07:42, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply (and to Jeremy who replied on my talk page). It probably would have been clearer if the bot only changed the sub-projects which had already been integrated as task forces adding the other sub-projects as and when they're integrated. --JD554 (talk) 07:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The bot was blocked by the admins :( Please see User_talk:Tinucherian#Malfunctioning_Bot -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 08:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

WP Assessments 1.0 categories for Foodservice and other taskforces

Hi folks, currently you have Quality and Importance stats for the Main Project "Food and drink " only, like this.

Food and drink articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA		7	13	28			48
FL		2		1			3
FM					139		139
GA	13	24	73	251		5	366
B	54	227	331	579		57	1,248
C	79	388	954	2,713		465	4,599
Start	23	322	1,642	9,829	5	3,790	15,611
Stub	1	26	554	7,824		5,040	13,445
List	9	69	108	466	23	272	947
Category		9	1	2	7,566		7,578
Disambig				7	149		156
File					2,999		2,999
Portal					614		614
Project					384		384
Redirect		10	70	535	2,678		3,293
Template		1			946		947
Other				3	190		193
Assessed	179	1,085	3,746	22,238	15,693	9,629	52,570
Unassessed				20		1,940	1,960
Total	179	1,085	3,746	22,258	15,693	11,569	54,530
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 181,644			Ω = 5.14

Do you wish to also obtain seperate stats for each taskforce ? I can help you out. My bot User:TinucherianBot can do this for you ( I know how to , I need to get a BRFA )... It will automatically create these WP 1.0 categories and their mappings for you.

1. Category:A-Class Foodservice articles
2. Category:B-Class Foodservice articles
3. Category:C-Class Foodservice articles
4. Category:FA-Class Foodservice articles
5. Category:FL-Class Foodservice articles
6. Category:GA-Class Foodservice articles
7. Category:Start-Class Foodservice articles
8. Category:Stub-Class Foodservice articles
9. Category:List-Class Foodservice articles
10. Category:Unassessed-Class Foodservice articles
11. Category:Template-Class Foodservice articles
12. Category:Category-Class Foodservice articles
13. Category:Disambig-Class Foodservice articles
14. Category:Image-Class Foodservice articles
15. Category:Portal-Class Foodservice articles
16. Category:Needed-Class Foodservice articles
17. Category:Non-article Foodservice pages
18. Category:Foodservice articles with comments
19. Category:Foodservice articles by quality
20. Category:Foodservice articles by importance
21. Category:Top-importance Foodservice articles
22. Category:High-importance Foodservice articles
23. Category:Mid-importance Foodservice articles
24. Category:Low-importance Foodservice articles
25. Category:Unknown-importance Foodservice articles

So In the Banner {{WikiProject Food and drink}} we map the category to "|Foodservice=yes" , So the the WP 1.0 bot will reguarly update the stats in

Foodservice articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA				3			3
GA		4	11	29		1	45
B	3	14	27	61		3	108
C	4	25	108	265		28	430
Start	1	27	140	1,073		393	1,634
Stub		3	37	547		425	1,012
List		7	5	24	6	7	49
Category					530		530
Disambig					5		5
File					147		147
Portal					1		1
Project					13		13
Redirect			2	38	97		137
Template					79		79
Other					4		4
Assessed	8	80	330	2,040	882	857	4,197
Unassessed						81	81
Total	8	80	330	2,040	882	938	4,278
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 16,369			Ω = 5.07

. Thoughts ? - -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 04:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me.--Chef Tanner (talk) 20:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Poorly thought out tagging

My watchlist is swamped with tagged articles that are not at all or only remotely related to food or drink. Why did nobody check the list before letting the bot run amok??? Please check the logs yourself and do not expect that other people clean up after you (as requested in the edit summary and on the bot page)! Cacycle (talk) 16:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Especially problematic for the pages on my watchlist were the following categories: Category:Flavors, Category:Preservatives, Category:Essential_oils, Category:Bitter compounds, Category:Flavor technology, Category:Salvia divinorum, and Category:Chicken (I stopped checking after one page!). You most probably do not want every chemical that has ever been found in food or that has been, or could potentially be, added to food within the scope of your procect. Beside the inclusion of some obviously inappropriate categories, the whole approach to use a list of categories to tag articles without manual checking is fundamentally flawed (e.g. Chicken coop, chicken hypnotism, and why did the chicken cross the road? are in Category:Chicken but they are not food related). The easiest way out of the mess is probably to revert everything and then start over again. Cacycle (talk) 16:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. I've seen this kind of bot-tagging before in several projects, and it almost never works correctly. The end result is just more work and headaches all around. I'm especially opposed to its re-tagging of child projects, such as WP:BEER. Between that and the banner changes, this looks, feels, and smells like a hostile takeover. – ClockworkSoul 16:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Do not "revert everything"; 90% of the tags are appropriate and we've determined exactly which categories had mistaken tagging, and are removing those tags. All future runs will be more judicious and will involve human checking *before* rather than after the tagging is done. Badagnani (talk) 17:54, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Please do not get upset, instead take the time to talk with others before jumping to such conclusions. Beer is a drink and the Project is Food and Drink which covers all beverages. It can exist under both Projects, for an example look at the Boston, Massachusetts article, it is under both the Wikipedia:WikiProject Massachusetts and the Wikipedia:WikiProject Boston, Parent and child.

As I have stated, I just want to make a good faith effort to make things easier to assess, clean up talk pages with excessive banners and foster a sense of community between the various Foodie articles. That's it. Please remember that assumptions are the mother of all foul ups, so again, ask. I will gladly make any correction needed, I poorly worded the proposals, and that caused confusion, I will fix it. Don't come in shouting "Hostile Takeover!" as it is insulting. Assuming the worst and coming in primed for battle is how stupid rivalries get started. Come in with an open mind and you maybe pleasantly surprised.

Also, please take the time to figure out why we mis-tagged your articles. As an hypothetical example, why did the bot tag the Marijuana article? Upon examination, you would find that some joker put Category:Baking in because you get "baked" when you smoke it, man.

Getting angry at us because we inadvertently tagged your article because of situations such as the one I outlined is counterproductive. Yes, you now have to do more work to fix this, but why wasn't the issue addressed before? If there is a problem with the article being mis-categorized, that is not our fault. If the category was improperly assigned as a sub-category to Category:Foods, that is not our fault.

DYK, all carpentry articles are are under the foods cat for some reason? The bot owner and I eliminated about 1,100 categories before we started this project, but I still figured 4-7% error rate, hence the problem list above. I have started a list of categories that were mis-identified and was going to use that as a fix list. Trust me, I planned for this. Poor planning is just another assumption.

Take the time when editing to not look only at content, but how the article is indexed. Look at the template you are using to see how it might categorize your article, look at the Category:x-x-x-x at the bottom to see what others have done. Do the due diligence to insure it is correct to avoid these mistakes.

Please, just don't shoot the messenger.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 20:17, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

If you put a cup in the microwave that has a fork in it, is it not your fault because people shouldn't put forks in cups in the first place? It is one thing if an article is tagged because it is in a ill-fitting category, but it is another to not even look at the subcategories. That is lazy and that is your fault. Instead of copping-out, own up and fix it. It is possible to this sort of thing well, it's just not easy. We are doing similar mass-tagging at WP:VG, but is through pre-designed lists based on template-usage and specific article-title phrasing. It is a lot slower this way, but it is more accurate, respectful, and doesn't piss people off. JohnnyMrNinja 20:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Jeremy, you miss the point - the majority of the problems were NOT caused by mis-categorized articles, but by editors and bot-operators lacking basic understanding of the categorization system on Wikipedia. That a category is food-related or that a category has some food-related articles in it does not mean that all (or even most) articles or linked categories are food related. Again: It is not possible to use article categorization as the sole source for automated tagging. Cacycle (talk) 21:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying, but if I were to expand on your reasoning in a real world scenario: A librarian files Darwin's Origin of Species book under fiction because she believes it to be false, another librarian comes along and makes a list of all books physically in that section and then gets reprimanded because she compiled the list containing mis-filed books.

Because of issues like this, the categorization system has become unreliable. My point is, yeah, I screwed up by relying on the category system, but this whole issue shows a fundamental flaw in the system. It should be our Dewey decimal system, I should not have to go looking for a looking for a historical article on animal husbandry in a section reserved for beef dishes, and controversially the "librarian" should not be putting them there in the first place. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 23:48, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Categories are not hierarchical, and they should not be. Category:Restaurants => Category:Dining clubs => Category:Traditional gentlemen's clubs => Athletic Club of Columbus (tagged for the project). Categories can belong to more than one category themselves, just as articles can (and should). It was irresponsible of the bot operator to do this no matter who gave them the list. JohnnyMrNinja 00:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

So we're to rely on the Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon method of indexing? Do you see the problem with that? IMHO, that very tenuous connection should not exist, its like saying Barnes and Noble => Books => Lady Chatterley's Lover => Naked Women => Hugh Hefner. I do not like that at all- If something can be in two categories, then put it in two categories. Don't put in category A and relate it to category B which is related to cat C thus making A a subset of C. It is illogical. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 01:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Respectfully, Jeremy, you don't get to choose how the system works. The fact of the matter is that it doesn't use the Dewey Decimal System, and this fiasco doesn't so much illustrate a fundamental flaw in the system as it does a fundamental flaw in your understanding of both categories and wikiprojects (and the concept of boldness). Don't blame us because we're annoyed that you make a big mess we'll possibly have to clean up. Don't blame the bot for doing what you told it to do. Don't blame the system for not being logical enough. You did it all by yourself by failing to research what you were doing, failing to ask others' opinions, and by going off half-cocked. Yes, you had noble intentions, but this is a collaborative project. Never forget that boldness does not mean doing whatever you want when you want it: it is at its heart an invitation to be creative and innovative, but not at the expense of the project itself. – ClockworkSoul 02:34, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

We live and learn. The problem was not the category system; most of the articles were properly categorized. However, in any category one does find articles that do not exactly match the subject at hand--for example, an article about glass bottles in a "Wine" category. This is why, as I have stated, anyone doing a bot run does need to carefully check every article in every cat that is to be tagged by a bot--before, not after such tagging is done. Badagnani (talk) 07:05, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The recent issues witn WP:FOOD Tagging with TinucherianBot is discussed at Wikipedia:Bot_owners'_noticeboard#TinucherianBot . This is just FYI -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - 06:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

How do we fix the tagging issue, instead of pointing fingers?

It might of been better to tag one category at a time, look through the article the bot was going to tag and then let it go instead of blanketing the large amount of categories. This would take more time and would be our responsibility here at the project, not the bot creator/owner. The mistakes have been made though and everyone keeps trying to point fingers instead of trying to come up with a resolution. What do we see for a resolution? The options probably include things such as reversing the tagging, breaking people up into teams to attack this behemoth of articles (which honestly we can't count on because I'll admit even my diligence wanes eventually from doing the tedious stuff all the time), or does anyone else have any options? Let's get past the blame game and come up with a viable solution to what people are saying is a problem so that we can stop the bickering.--Chef Tanner (talk) 15:15, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, bickering will solve nothing. The proposals seem to me to break down into several actionable issues. Assuming that the state of the food projects before this event was not broken, yet could be improved upon, I have a few suggestions:

• Mass tagging - This needs to be taken in very careful phases. I suggest that we begin by detagging obviously mistagged articles before we do any more automated tagging at all. While that goes on, I highly suggest we work together to hammer out a statement defining which articles are WP:FOOD articles and why. Some (most, even) are obviously in or out, but some are disputed (such as articles already tagged by child projects). This will require a bit of discussion, but a task of this size should not proceed without it.
• The WP:FOOD banner - On the surface, this isn't a bad idea, and I sincerely applaud its boldness. I'm warming up to this idea now that I've slept on it a bit, and am no longer openly hostile to it. It cannot, however, be half implemented: either the old project banners should be replaced with the FOOD "omni-banner", or child projects should be removed from the umbrella banner. To do it any other way would increase banner clutter rather than reduce it. Obviously, the former solution would also make the tagging much more straight-forward.

• The stated goal - The stated goal for this undertaking, as I understand it, is to encourage a sense of community among the various food projects and task forces, which I am also very much in favor of. If this is the case, we need to go far beyond tagging and banners. For example, we can take a cue from other projects that have successfully done this by:
  1. Creating a joint discussion board for all of the related projects, and
  2. Implementing a joint "article of the month" for the projects. This last one is risky, though, because not everybody's interests are as broad as others. I, for example, am a brewer and beer judge, and know (and care) a great deal more about that subject than I do more general food subjects (food service, for example, I couldn't care less about).

In a nutshell, I hope to reach a conclusion where the focus of the task-forces and child projects is preserved. The danger in this kind of approach is that the end result could be a large homogeneous mass of tagged articles with very little ability for people to specialize in the areas where they are most comfortable (me with beer, for example). At the same time, however, the result has to be inclusive and collaborative enough that the result isn't a disparate group of entirely inward-focused fiefdoms. It's a fine line to walk, and not a task to be undertaken lightly or without plan. – ClockworkSoul 16:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Another motivation for the project was an article I read in the Boston Globe some months ago, it was about how brewers were taking a look at how vintners pair wines with foods. They were staging beer tastings that matched the different varieties of beer with specific, complimentary foods.

Also, additional Globe articles concerning the Utopia brews from Sam Adams and an interview on WAAF several years ago with the owner of Boston Beer works (beer and foodservice) concerning similar aged beer which were are closer to liqueurs and are consumed as an aperitif got me thinking about the famous seven course meal. That is when I realized there was not enough integration between our projects and came up with the proposal. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 17:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

• All I want to see done is this - When bot-tagging, do not place your WPJ's tag above all others. Common sense tells us the most relevant WPJ tag should be first. By default, have the bot place the new tag below, then humans can bump it up on a case-by-case basis. Talk:Thresher_shark has been pointed out as an extreme example of bad WPJ Food banner tagging - there is no way it should be above WPJ Shark. - Merzbow (talk) 22:02, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

So, how do we proceed?

It's been a bit quiet here the last few days, and I'd really like to move forward. First, I think it would be helpful for us to start by creating a community discussion board for the entire F&D clan (low-hanging fruit, and all). Second, I would also like to really discuss the tagging issue as though it had never discussed before (i.e., leaving all the baggage the subject has accumulated behind). Let's start with this very open ended statement/question: it is a given that some number of articles in the scope of F&D's child projects should also be tagged as being part of the scope of F&D. What proportion of the child project's articles should be tagged as F&D articles and why? – ClockworkSoul 03:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Anybody? – ClockworkSoul 18:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

This general approach sounds eminently reasonable to me, although I don't have specific answers for all the questions. I'd think this hypothetical new forum joining all the related projects would be the ideal place to discuss this, but to get things started right here I'd point out that the proportion of child project articles tagged as F&D will presumably vary by the child project, but my first estimate (based primarily on the beer project) would be fairly conservative, something like 1-5% -- really, I think some are obvious strong cases of overlap (e.g. beer, at least the big beer styles if not every one), while I don't think most individual breweries belong in F&D, or most of the beer culture stuff, and then there will be the gray areas (er, grayer areas). I guess any of this can be disputed, which is presumably the whole point of having this discussion, but my first impression is that only the articles that substantially contribute to an understanding of F&D basics, i.e. not every little detail and not tangential articles that are beer-related, belong in F&D. --Daniel11 (talk) 04:18, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I have been working in the real world and have been unable to do much on WP.

• We do need to create a community discussion page. When Admin Man, in his secret identity of mild mannered chef Chris, comes back from his Vegas sojourn we can figure out how we go about that. Maybe a F&D noticeboard of some sort.
• Starting anew is a good idea.
• I agree with Daniel, we can work on this.

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 17:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I like the idea of a shared notice-board/forum. Where there is true cross-over Beer could certainly do with some assistance from F&D and other sibling projects. SilkTork *^YES! 12:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

False Positives

I'm only taking care of the false-positives on my watchlist, but (in addition to several correct tags) its somehow tagged the USC Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies and the Los Angeles Athletic Club. --Bobak (talk) 19:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles for creation

Need a much more prominent section for article titles for creation, as other WikiProjects have. There wasn't even a section for this on the main project page. Badagnani (talk) 01:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

It's on the Food Portal but I can add it here, no one else has ever mentioned it before.--Chef Tanner (talk) 01:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Oops, I'm wrong, I must of gotten rid of it awhile ago from the Food Portal page, my thought at the time probably had to do that I have been the only one taking care of the portal for the last year and no one had requested adding or removing any of the articles.--Chef Tanner (talk) 01:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

It's a really good tool. I added it in the "to do" box (with one article about a Food Network personality) but the typeface seems a bit small. Badagnani (talk) 18:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

it is now on the right side of the project main page, there is an edit link located at the bottom of that panel which will take you to the "edit right panel" page.--Chef Tanner (talk) 15:10, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Dubious tagging and spelling/grammar errors in automated message

Hi foodies,

TinucherianBot dubiously tagged Rue, Sweet Flag‎, rubber source Guayule, and even the highly poisonous Calabar bean‎ as food articles. Also, would someone please correct the errors in the bot's automated message (like so).

« D. Trebbien (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The bot tagged quite a few items which it shouldn't of, there is an ongoing discussion on the subject and how to remedy it if you read up this page a little further. However, Rue is indeed a food item being a bitter herb used in some cuisines which is actually noted in the article.--Chef Tanner (talk) 16:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Calabar bean‎ probably should not have been placed in the Category:Edible legumes group. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 23:17, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

A discussion

An important discussion on " Should WikiProjects get prior approval of other WikiProjects (Descendant or Related or any ) to tag articles that overlaps their scope ? " is open here . We welcome you to participate and give your valuable opinions. -- TinuCherian ^{(Wanna Talk?)} - , member of WikiProject Council. 13:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

DYK

Hey, why the project does not have a DYK section unlike other projects? (Well, I'm engaged in 3 projects though) Or is it already here that I can't find yet? --Caspian blue (talk) 15:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

it's currently on the Food Portal, but I will add one here when I have time later today.--Chef Tanner (talk) 15:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Aren't the project and portal separated from each other? I though so, and I think I would not likely go over there.....--Caspian blue (talk) 15:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

They are on seperate pages, but this project is in charge of keeping the Portal updated which is why I take care of it. I'll get ya a space here in a little bit, I need to go make dinner first.--Chef Tanner (talk) 01:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

It has been done, there is an edit function toward the top of the right panel.--Chef Tanner (talk) 14:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, but the panel is small, because the food once on DYK may have its notability more than others, so I want to see the full list of such foods or foods related entries like this Wikipedia:WikiProject_Museum#DYK and Wikipedia:Korea-related_topics_notice_board#Did_you_know.3F_on_the_Main_Page. Members of Food can edit freely to add DYK entries. --Caspian blue (talk) 14:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Our project is laid out differently than other project's pages and I aim for consistency in the Food and Drink related projects such as with WP:Wine, WP:Beer, etc., so I don't think that we need to have that giant thing on our main page. there is only one item on there, because I added it, feel free to add whatever you want. Also, like I said, go up to the upper right hand side of the side panel and there is a "edit this panel icon", Ill try to figure out if i can make it more prominent for you, or I will post the link in your discussion page.--Chef Tanner (talk) 14:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, of course each project has its own standard, and I think the layout of our project is looking good. However, food project is huge, so food articles with DYK have very good attraction already, and are recommendable to read. I think if you make a subpage for DYK section, a few (5 or 6) of latest entries would only be transcluded on the section. But if some people like me want to read the whole history of entries which once were on DYK, that subpage would be a good opportunity for them. --Caspian blue (talk) 14:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I added a link to edit the page in the DYK section.--Chef Tanner (talk) 14:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Administrator

Just to let everyone know here that I have recently been given the capabilities to use administrator tools. As such, I wanted to let everyone know that if they have an issue where they feel that they need to have a page protected they are having issues with vandalism or the like, you are welcome to come to me personally instead of having to search for the proper page to request help from an outside person. This is not to say that I automatically say "hey he/she is a Food and Drink person (or other sibling project person)" and will make the change for you instantly, I will be (hopefully) just as unbiased as any other admin. on the subject, I will hopefully just be more intimately knowledgeable on the subject you are addressing and easier to approach.--Chef Tanner (talk) 15:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

New format

Wowww, the new format (where the "requested articles" section is), looks extremely good. Who did that? Badagnani (talk) 05:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I did as per the request you made above.--Chef Tanner (talk) 15:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

• I like the design and layout of your project page: alot actually. Just a point of trivia: do you know who created the original version that is the prototype for several other projects' pages? ;) – ClockworkSoul 09:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I borrowed the idea over a year ago from WP:Wine and I also used it on WP:Softdrinks, WP:Beer, and what are now the Cheeses task force, Foodservice task force, and Herbs and Spices taskforce I think about eight or nine months ago, in an attempt for consistency for anyone going between the projects so it would be easier to find things they were looking for as we are all associated. I still haven't gotten to that Ice Cream project to update their main page. I'm not sure who came up with that original template.--Chef Tanner (talk) 15:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It was my design. :) I used it first on WP:MCB, then WP:VIRUS. I love to see that it's being used. – ClockworkSoul 15:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I knew there had to be some hidden message in there haha. It does make the projects look so much better than the generic white washed pages with the table of contents unnecessarily taking up so much room. I even used it for my user page. I certainly appreciate the work you put into the original design.--Chef Tanner (talk) 15:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you like it! I'm planning on adding a wikiproject page building module into WP:IGOR when I get the chance. Did you know I created the standing talk page template look and feel? I know, now I'm just bragging. :D – ClockworkSoul 13:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Task force banners

All WP Food task force banners have now been moved over to the integrated banner. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 07:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Where in this page does it list the banners? It should link to a page with all the banners, explaining exactly how to add them to each type of talk page that is found without a banner. Badagnani (talk) 07:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:FDBanners or {{WPFOOD}}, linked above as well. You can also find the link on the project and task force main pages. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 07:29, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

:Don't create Main article namespace pages to redirect to wikiproject pages . Use sometime like this WP:FDBanners to redirect them .. Just my 2 cents -- TinuCherian ^(Chat?) - 07:34, 10 July 2008 (UTC) Thanks. -- TinuCherian ^(Chat?) - 07:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I've just made a few wikilinks to make it more apparent how to get to the banners. Badagnani (talk) 07:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Cromniomancy

someone needs to review this page for appropriateness for this project's categories. i am hesitant to just remove the tags, since i don't know how far you folks want to cast your nets. seems pretty far afield to me. Toyokuni3 (talk) 04:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this into our attention. It was tagged as it was under Category:Onions . I have removed the banner from the article. -- TinuCherian ^(Chat?) - 05:14, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Rum Swizzle

The article Rum Swizzle is currently undergoing an AfD debate. Comments form policy savvy editors (for deletion or against it) will be very welcome in order to generate consensus. Thanks. - House of Scandal (talk) 19:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Result was speedy Keep. Archive me baby!

--Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 23:38, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Naming convention

I've noticed that "cuisine of XXX" and "XXX cuisine" are both used for naming cuisine articles. Should we try to make a specific naming convention similar to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (languages)?

We have pretty much agreed on Xxx cuisine. However there are some exceptions, Cuisine of the United States vs American cuisine is one. I have no issue with establishing a convention on this. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 18:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I've made a proposal for a naming policy at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (cuisines). Everyone is encouraged to make improvements and to discuss their prefered solution.

Peter ^Isotalo 09:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Portal:Food

Portal:Food requires immediate attention in order for it to retain its featured portal status. Please see the concerns raised at Wikipedia:Featured portal removal candidates/Portal:Food OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 05:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

It will be worked on in the coming days, Peter has updated the Selected Articles, I will do what I can in the next couple days but it will be slowish as I am away at a chef convention in Las Vegas. We'll get them all up to 20 articles by the deadline I guess and I will update the news tonight after I am done with my seminars.--Chef Tanner (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Wrigley Square

Talk:Wrigley Square has been tagged with your project template. Do you feel that this is correct?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

it was tagged by a bot which tagged all articles in cat Category:Wrigley Company with food and drink tag. In this case it was inappropriate. Above you can see some of the discussion resulting from the bots actions. GameKeeper (talk) 20:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Herbs and Spices editing dispute

Hi. Following a recent bout of edit-warring at Template:Herbs & spices and Template:Herb and spice mixtures I have protected these templates until disputes are resolved. In the interest of lifting the protection as quickly as possible, it would be very helpful if a few people from this WikiProject could contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/Herbs and Spices task force#Herbs & spices template. CIreland (talk) 06:00, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Request - Nigella Lawson

I'm currently in the process of improving/expanding the Nigella Lawson article, hopefully to take it from its current GA status to FA. I've recently taken the Elaine Paige article to FA status, but one of the things that slowed the nomination down was the fact I didn't have a copyedit done before the process started. I would be really appreciative if a member of this Wikiproject with some 'fresh eyes' could do a copyedit of the Nigella article. I think the prose is OK, but I don't think it's quite up to featured standard. If someone could perhaps find some time to do this, I would be extremely grateful, and I think the promotion of the article would also be a good for the project. Many thanks. Eagle Owl (talk) 19:08, 22 July 2008 (UTC)