Talk:Chateaubriand (dish)

"Some"

And who is this "Some" who is so often mentioned as an authority and who invariably seems to get it wrong? --Wetman 15:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

DisputedAssertion

"However wonderful and tender a Chateaubriand is, it is still a cut from the filet, and so it is less tasty than other cuts." This is a very unencyclopedic wording. "Tasty" is often a matter of personal preference, so if there's an objective measure being used here then it should be explained in those terms instead of as "tasty". I'm not very familiar with culinary terms for the qualities of beef, but hopefully someone else will be able to re-write this part. --Icarus ^(Hi!) 19:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Cut, or Recipe?

As far as I can tell, "Chateaubriand steak" is a recipe, not an actual cut. Also, from the short loin, not the sirloin. See "Cutting Up in the Kitchen" by Merle Ellis, 1975, page 46. - MSTCrow 03:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Chateaubriand and Fillet Mignon are NOT the same

As far as I am aware, Chateaubriand and Fillet Mignon are completely different cuts of meat. They are actually opposites. As I understand it, the Fillet Mignon are from the 'tail' end of the fillet, where it tapers off. This is why they are 'cute or small'. The Chateaubriand is at the very 'head' of the fillet. It is the broad node at the end. Can anyone else confirm this? If so, can this attempt to merge the two articles be removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.22.186 (talk) 12:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Noteability

Thats no sauce, but a garniture in professional terms and WP:cookingbook is elsewhere. Serten (talk) 07:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

(Note that the comment directly above was merged here from Talk:Chateaubriand sauce). Many sources used in the article refer to Chateaubriand sauce specifically as a sauce. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:27, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Merger complete

  Y Merger complete. Information from Chateaubriand sauce has been merged into this article. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Wrong image (not tenderloin)

The current image depicts a rib eye not a tenderloin cut. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.117.113.91 (talk) 16:51, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

"Planked preparation"

Does EVERY SINGLE SENTENCE under this subhead actual need to be referenced right back to the SAME WORK? Or would one citation at the end not serve better? 72.106.150.86 (talk) 04:05, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done No, no they do not. Removed them all, apart from one. And it only took us 2.5 years! ;-) Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 12:53, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Image of "braised tenderloin"

The caption says: "A braised tenderloin of beef that has been seared in a heavy skillet".

Firstly, that unappetising-looking lump of meat doesn't look as if it's been anywhere near a searing pan - it looks pretty much grey. In fact it looks as if someone really has just simmered it in water. And if it truly had been seared, then I'd expect the string to be charred, at least a little.

Secondly, the article is about Chateaubriand; there is no braising step in the preparation of chateaubriand. Fillet/Tenderloin is not tough meat; braising would ruin it.

I propose to remove the picture; it adds nothing to the article, and it doesn't illustrate anything discussed in the article, since there is no braising discussed in the article-body.

I don't make chateaubriand very often, because it's super-expensive and rather extravagant. Next time I do, I can photograph the seared meat myself, and upload the resulting image. But don't hold your breath, it might be a few months.

MrDemeanour (talk) 13:26, 11 November 2021 (UTC)