Talk:Marcus Wareing

WP:FOOD Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Restaurants or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. You can find the related request for tagging here -- TinucherianBot (talk) 10:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Lost stars?

The introduction says the restaurant Marcus has one Michelin star. However, in the text, it says it gained its second star in 2009, but does not mention a star being lost since. Can this be clarified? --Eddyspeeder (talk) 13:27, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

 

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Marcus Wareing/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starts GA Reassessment. The reassessmment will follow the same sections of the Article. --Whiteguru (talk) 06:26, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

 

Result: Delisted. Legitimate issues raised, no opposition or improvements made --Whiteguru (talk) 01:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

 

---

Observations

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

• Prose is well written and clear.
• Infobox is good work, apt references

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

• Reference 1 is WP:UGC and not admissible as a reliable source
• Reference 3 is a 404
• Reference 4 requires registration. Archived version does not.
• Reference 6 requires subscription
• Reference 8 is a dead link. Use Archived version
• Reference 11 requires registration Archived version
• Reference 14 requires registration. Archived version
• Reference 16 is a dead link
• Reference 20 is a dead link
• Reference 21 requires registration. Archived version

1. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

• Section Early Life is a concise summary.
• In 2007 Pétrus was awarded its second Michelin star duplicates mention in the previous paragraph

1. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

• It is clear this chef is not afraid of entering into conflict with other chefs. The coverage is neutral and balanced.

1. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

• This article was created on 7 May 2006
• 343 edits to this article by 180 editors
• Pageviews: last 90 days = 56,304 page views
• Daily average is 619 page views
• Many of the top editors to this article have not visited since 2016.

1. Notifying Editors:

• Editor Miyagawa: has not contributed significantly since July 2018
• Editor Dodgster: Latest logged action 2007-04-25 23:11
• Editor Carolinedrayton1982: Latest logged action 2017-11-06 11:52
• Editor MWCN123: Latest logged action 2016-08-16 15:47
• Editor Snigbrook: Latest logged action 2010-10-16 16:12
• A total of three involved editors were able to be notified. Updated, --Whiteguru (talk) 07:46, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

---

1. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

• Marcus Wareing Portrait.jpg = Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license.

1. Overall:

• This article encounters the challenges between chefs and their egos and their restaurant openings and closures with neutrality, leaving the readers to follow through on the references and encounter the conflict. The Berkeley (formerly Marcus Wareing at The Berkeley) is no longer a two-star Michelin restaurant. A robust article with a pleasing number of daily views. If we can repair the matters raised above, the article should retain its GA rating. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:29, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

---

• Legitimate concerns raised above were not addressed. Should editors seek another reassessment, the issues raised above need to be addressed first before a reassessment can be commenced. --Whiteguru (talk) 01:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.