Talk:Milt's Stop & Eat

Untitled

Listing hot dogs and french fries after stating that fast food is served, and then claiming the food is notable, seems excessive, and appears you are camping on this article. Reverted.

Promotional content

and now sell "grass-fed, hormone-free" buffalo burgers. The malts are also prepared from milk from local "Swiss brown cows" from a family farm in the Spanish Valley outside of Moab.

@Scope creep: How does this qualify as WP:PROMO? I find it to be informative objective sourced information. Not all of it even appears on the business's website, most of it is directly from a news article. ––FormalDude talk 08:11, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Can you explain to me how this most obvious PR language speak, which is the kind of marketing spiel you see in London, Zurich, everywhere in the west. Particularly when the information comes directly from the owner? How can it be objective, when its industry standard marketing speaking? Here is an example: [1] Local produce has been a thing now for more than a decade. There is not special or notable about it, and its promotional banner. scope_creep^Talk 08:27, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

@Scope creep: It doesn't matter if it's industry standard marketing-speak as long is it is supported by a reliable secondary source, which, in this case, it is. If you have a different proposal for wording what the restaurant sells and where it sources it from, please provide it. If you're trying to make the case that it is against WP:PROMO to describe what a restaurant sells and where it sources it from, good luck. ––FormalDude talk 03:14, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

You need stop edit warring and start discussing. I can't even open a WP:3O for this because there has been so little discussion. ––FormalDude talk 08:49, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

I was summoned from Discord. I would suggest rewording the sentences, as they are a bit promotional. If there was a major change in their policies, that should be noted. However, the Deseret News article should be cited at the end of the meat sentence, as the other sources do not say anything about what the buffalo (cattle?) are fed. There are similar problems with a few other sources. For example, the "hormone-free" quote comes from the Outside article, but that article is not cited at the end of the sentence. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 09:43, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

To me, the article does come across as promotional. For instance, this "Milt's Stop & Eat serves fast-food staples including hotdogs, french fries, onion rings, and soft drinks.[5][6] Milt's is reportedly known for its hamburgers and cold maltshakes.[7][8][9]"; the passing mentions of the various food stuffs in some sources do not make them relevant to the encyclopaedia; we are not a menu.

It then continues in this line: "even Hollywood celebrities like John Wayne and Robert Duvall were among their clientele"; there is a passing mention that they ate at the restaurant once. Famous people occasional eat at restaurants; while a specific restaurant might like to publicize this, I would not consider it of sufficient relevance to warrant inclusion. Incidentally, I am not so sure we could classify the source stating that as reliable; can you give any more information on it so that we can better assess?

Finally, this line comes across as promotional: "and now sell "grass-fed, hormone-free" buffalo burgers.[12][7][13] The malts are prepared with milk from "Swiss brown cows" from a farm in the Spanish Valley outside of Moab." Once again, I don't see the need to list what the restaurant sells, and the additional promotional aspects like "grass-fed, hormone free" and "Swiss Brown cows" are particularly problematic.

I also have questions about notability, as I'm not sure we have WP:THREE, but I'll look into them later.

BilledMammal (talk) 23:17, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Here's more information on the Utah National Park Trips source: https://www.nationalparktrips.com/about. May be worth taking to WP:RS/N. ––FormalDude talk 23:49, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

@BilledMammal: You should state your questions/concerns with notability before you place the maintenance tag on the article please. ––FormalDude talk 23:52, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

I think I did state them; I'm not certain we have WP:THREE sources that meet WP:NCORP. Further, two separate editors have added or restored the tag; I don't believe it is appropriate for you to be removing it without discussion. BilledMammal (talk) 00:55, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

WP:THREE is not a policy nor a guideline.

Further, I didn't remove it without discussion, I'm the only one who has been having consistent discussion on this talk page.

As for sources that meet WP:NCORP, there is NatGeo, LA Times, and the Chicago Tribune. ––FormalDude talk 00:59, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

It's a commonly used standard to understand the "multiple" requirement, and discussion includes giving people time to respond. This includes giving User:JohnDVandevert time to respond.

As for those three, I don't believe any of them consists of the coverage required to meet WP:CORPDEPTH, as they do not go beyond "brief mentions".

While I have you here, I plan to remove the content with the issues discussed above. I note you didn't have any objection to the points I raised above, so I thought I would explicitly ask if you had any such objections before doing so. BilledMammal (talk) 01:04, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

That may be the case, but it doesn't change the fact that WP:THREE is not a policy.

I do have objections. As I said above, it is not against WP:PROMO to describe what a restaurant sells and where it sources it from. In fact, most all restaurant articles describe what the restaurants sells, and it is not uncommon to note the sourcing of what they sell either. Take for example a similar article, Dog n Suds, which lists their entire menu and describes how they make their own rootbeer.

All you've done is quoted encyclopedic sentences and attached the adjectives "promotional" and "problematic" without providing any substantial justification. ––FormalDude talk 01:19, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Regardless of the status of THREE WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH are policy, and if you can find two sources that meet them then we can discuss WP:THREE. Until then, it's a bit of a waste of time.

I'm also not sure you're reading what I wrote properly. I might not have provided reasons that are in your opinion sufficiently detailed, but I have provided reasons. With that said, let me go into a little more detail. WP:SALES for the menus, WP:PROPORTION for the fact that two notable individuals once ate there, and WP:PROMOTION for the "grass fed" etc; it is obvious marketing spiel, and unless we have significant coverage of their beef being "grass fed" etc, then it is not relevant to an encyclopaedia entry.

Incidentally, I don't believe Dog n Suds should list their menu either. BilledMammal (talk) 01:50, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

See my source assessment table at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milt's Stop & Eat for the multiple sources that meet WP:GNG.

As for your other feedback: WP:SALES is not a shortcut, so I'm not sure what your referring to, and I've explained why I think the menus should be featured. WP:PROPORTION for the fact that two notable individuals once ate there, I'll have to look at that and consider. The grass fed I'll give you, that should be removed. ––FormalDude talk 01:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I would disagree with that assessment table, specifically the "significant" column, as explained above for the first three. For SLT, it fails WP:CORPDEPTH; it lacks significant coverage, and "Top N" lists like it are actually listed as an example of trivial coverage. I notice that User:HighKing nominated it just three weeks ago, but I wonder if it was closed too soon given that now two additional users have raised notability questions; perhaps another AfD would be appropriate.

Apologies, I meant WP:NOTSALE. Thank you for removing the "grass fed"; I would also consider "hormone free" and "prepared with milk from "Swiss brown cows" from a farm in the Spanish Valley outside of Moab" to fall under the same classification. BilledMammal (talk) 02:09, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

And I've reached that point where I'm too tired to drag this on. Go ahead and make whatever bold edits you want, if I really disagree I'll say something. ––FormalDude talk 02:17, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

References