Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cheese

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Cheese

self-nom.

Peer reviewed here. I think this article is a good, comprehensive look at cheese now. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:34, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

• Support - A comprehensive and well-written article. Cedars 04:44, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Object:
  1. The image Image:Title Cuisine.jpg is claimed as "fair use". "Fair use" images should never be used in series boxes or other templates.
  2. The image Image:Bleu de Gex jpg.jpg is claimed as GFDL, but does not indicate the creator/copyright holder. This is a violation of the GFDL.

  --Carnildo 05:36, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Comment — Bleu de Gex jpg.jpg looks like it comes from this page. There's no copyright information, so we cannot assume GFDL. The uploaderCommons:User:Michiel1972 has been asked to verify copyright status before, but it seems nothing has been done. However, Title Cuisine.jpg looks like it has been properly taken from stock.xchng, which states that there are no usage restrictions on theimage. --Gareth Hughes 12:15, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Good work Gareth, I've retagged the image PD as this seems consistent with what the original author wrote (he did not tag it fair use that was the work of Eclipsael). Cedars 13:43, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Response: Thank you very much, Gareth and Cedars, for dealing with the Cuisine image. I've replaced Image:Bleu de Gex jpg.jpg with Image:Vacherin du haut Doubs.jpg, which is hopefully more-legitimately tagged. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:21, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Support. Looks good. --Carnildo 20:56, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Support — I love this article! --Gareth Hughes 16:06, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
• Support - Based on a quick read, I like it. Nice, wide-ranging overview. - dcljr (talk) 19:53, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
• Support Mild Object. This article has improved substantially since I last read it, but I think a few problems need to be addressed before it becomes a FA.
  • I don't think that subheadings followed only by a couple of sentences "flows" well. Some of the subheadings (especially in Types of Cheeses and Making Cheese) should either be expanded or combined into more generalized sections. At least a paragraph or two for each heading, consisting of at least 4-5 sentences.
  • This is more of a suggestion than an objection, so feel free to ignore it. A section on how cheese is actually used is missing. Is it eaten alone, or used as an ingredient in cooking? What are some of the ways it is consumed? I know cheeses like paneer are never eaten by themselves but used only in cooking, while some types of cheese are best eaten plain. Sortan 01:09, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Response: Subsections have been combined; definitely an improvement. Thanks. Still wringing my hands about the Cheese usage idea. It might be one of those dithering "some cheeses are cooked, some aren't, some are sometimes according to some and not others" type of things... —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:29, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Another Response: I've added a fourth paragraph to the intro, partially addresing the cheese usage idea and partially addressing the lack of information about cheese melting qualities. Hope that helps. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:24, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Very nice! Sortan 19:19, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
• Object same as Sortan. Will support once those are addressed. Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 02:40, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Comments: I certainly agree about the short subsections. I've fixed up the Making cheese section, and it's all the better for it. I know it's not really your problem or Sortan's, but I'd love to hear a good idea for dealing with the Types of cheese section. Expanding the subsections as they stand now is just article-bloat, I think, while combining them defeats the purpose of the enumeration. A bullet-list with indented short descriptions? Or resorting to something cheesy (sorry!) like a table? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:03, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Well, for the "Types of cheese" simply don't use headers for a few of those and just combine them. Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 03:06, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
      • Subsections combined. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:29, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
    • OK, you've done a great job here - but there's still one or two one-sentence paragraphs here that need to be fixed. I'll support after that but I will add that there are some other mainly short paragraphs that might benefit from combining or lengthening - but then there is no such thing as a Wikipedia:Perfect article. Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 23:47, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
      • Thanks, RN. I've eliminated all but one single-sentence paragraph, mostly with additional content; the one remainder ("Some cheeses have specific bacteria or molds intentionally introduced to them before or during aging") introduces a list, so maybe it can slide? I've merged a few smaller paragraphs here and there as well. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:53, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
• Support Paragraphs are a little short but its FA material.... and its cheesy! Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 02:53, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
• Object - did you know that the Australian govt was banning several types of cheeses due to a health risk? I can't see a mention of this here... this strikes me as a non-intentional systemic bias. Also, the "History" section needs a brief sub-section lead. Also (and not entirely relevant) but I believe that List of cheeses doesn't include all cheeses - see Cheese.com's list of cheeses. - Ta bu shi da yu 00:41, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Fixed, I hope. True enough regarding the America-centric systemic bias in the raw-milk-risks paragraph; rephrased it and added a bit of info about Australia. Also added an intro paragraph to the history section, as requested. I'm not sure what to say about the list of cheeses; I have to admit I've barely ever even glanced at it. Let me know if you think the contents of that list effect the FA status of this article, and I'll do my best. With many world cheeses sharing names or only being known in the local language, I fear any attempt at clean comprehensiveness for that list is going to be tough. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:45, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Quick note before I check - each article stands on its own merit. The list won't effect this article! But it would be great to update that list... - Ta bu shi da yu 23:23, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
• Support, nice article. "I do like a bit of Gorgonzola". the wub "?!" 08:43, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
• Support Looks good - Yum OmegaWikipedia 17:16, 23 October 2005 (UTC)