Talk:Ancient Greek cuisine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 Ancient Greek cuisine was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: December 5, 2007
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Did You Know An entry from Ancient Greek cuisine appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 1 June 2006.
Wikipedia

Contents

[edit] Translator's notes

  • Aristophane's Frogs 1032, cited in the original does not discuss the subject matter the fr: version says it does (the spilling of blood) I have thuis left it out unless/until I can clarify this (possibly an error in page number or something...)
  • The fr: version gives a quote by Aelianus (I, 28) which comments on Rhodes inhabitants being great gourmets; when reading the original, all this says is that in Rhodes they prefer fish where others prefer meat, so I have left this out also. Bridesmill 01:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Concerning Frogs, 1032 does talk about the spilling of blood: Ὀρφεὺς μὲν γὰρ τελετάς θ' ἡμῖν κατέδειξε φόνων τ' ἀπέχεσθαι ("for Orpheus taught us rites and to refrain from killing"). Jastrow 10:58, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
My mistake - must have been asleep first time I looked on Perseus...fixed, thanks.Bridesmill 19:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wow

What an incredible article! Well done, Bridesmill. WP:FAC? -- ALoan (Talk) 15:47, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I am but a humble translator (well, ok, I added maybe 2% if that). the Fr wiki Greek history guys deserve the credit on this one (User:Jastrow here seems to be part of that crew)Bridesmill 00:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC) And thanks to all who did very quick & good copyedit....Bridesmill 00:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Indeed - well done them too. I was only looking at WP:FAOL the other day, and noticed that, for example, the French versions of Édouard Manet, Sparta, trebuchet and trireme were miles better that ours... -- ALoan (Talk) 11:04, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I found much of what i needed. Well written. Goldilocks24 19:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)Goldilocks24

[edit] Standard sections

Many sections in the article might benefit from more general naming. The Food and Drink Project has a template that is useful for sorting information under standardized headings.

Peter Isotalo 12:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA assessment

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:


1:

  • Lead section is insufficient - per WP:LEAD, this section should summarize the most important points covered in an article.
  • Numerous grammar errors – most prevalent is the use of colons as full stops and commas needed to separate independent clauses and parenthetical phrases, among others.
  • Numerous use of words to be avoided, peacock words, weasel words and phrasing not appropriate to encyclopedia articles – e.g. “was evidently water”, “in general opinion”, “great cooks such as…”, “apparently accompanied”, “was apparently proverbial” “some chefs”, “more and more Greeks”, “which gives us a good idea”, etc.
  • Tense issues – inconsistent use of past and present tense in the same paragraph (e.g. Wine section)

2:

  • The only inline citations provided are to attribute quotes to ancient literature. Article is, in regard to inline citations, essentially unreferenced.
  • It appears no effort was made to provide reasonable English-language references. WP:RSUE states, “English-language sources should be used in preference to foreign-language sources assuming the availability of an English-language source of equal quality”. Given that Greek cuisine is decidedly not French cuisine, I find it difficult to assume that no additional English sources could be provided.
  • Numerous NOR violations – e.g. “but this may be a matter of genre rather than real evidence of changes in farming and food customs”, “the Greeks would classify water as…”, “The phrase "Meal of Iccus" was apparently proverbial”, etc.

3:

  • Prima Facie complete topic-wise
  • Ideas not completed – e.g. article states onions “were symbolic of military life”, but does not elaborate as to why. Article states a particular food item was “important”, but does not elaborate as to why. Article states “meat was expensive, except for pork”; why wasn’t pork expensive? There are many other instances of incomplete ideas/topics.
  • Nonsequitors and unclear phrasing – e.g. “Larger fish, particularly prized by gourmets, were very expensive, such as tuna and eels from lake Copais in Boeotia, whose absence from Athens during the Peloponnesian War is alluded to in The Acharnians”. “The Greeks ate while seated, the use of benches being reserved for banquets”. Did they then sit on the ground? On chairs?

4:

  • NPOV violations – e.g. “the famous black gruel”

Overall:

  • This article is actually a quick-fail, given the presence of a clean-up banner. Article appears to be a direct translation of the featured French version (French article, however, retains appropriate footnoting). It would appear French and English wikis have vastly different requirements, as substantial work is needed on this article. Please feel free to contact me if help or elaboration is needed. Ɛƚƈơƅƅơƚɑ talk 14:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)