Talk:Restaurant/Archive 1

Archive 1

Michelin food guide

Michelin links to a tire company here. has some more background on the Michelin food guide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.162.121.133 (talk) 03:08, 13 August 2003 (UTC)

Famous restaurants

I think it would be almost impossible to create such a list while maintaining NPOV. Famous in whose opinion? Michelin's? Zagat's? I move to delete this section, which as it is, only has 2 entries. In fact, I'm gonna be bold and just do it, feel free to revert if you feel that this has been done in error Clemenjo 04:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Restaurant workers

can we have a discussion on the people who work at a restaurant? for instance what is a sky cap?? --Oldman 01:34, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Expansion request: Trattoria

"Trattoria" was a requested article, but now redirects here. This type of restaurant should be explained here, if this is to be kept. -- Beland 02:39, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

External links

I'd removed almost all external links except those few with general information on restaurants. I do not think this article should serve as web directory or promotional tool. Pavel Vozenilek 21:53, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Reversion of edit

At the start of the History section the sentence used to say "In China, food catering establishments..." somene removed China (presumably as redundant since Hangzhou is mentioned a few words later). I removed "In,". Mikkalai reverted my edit. I'm not sure how "In, food catering establishments which may be described as restaurants were known since 13th Century in Hangzhou" makes any sense. Was this a mistaken reversion? Is there an objection to simply having "Food catering establishments..." -- Siobhan Hansa 13:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

In the earlier versions of this sentence the text was somehing like "first food catering...", therefore I added the words "in China", since "first" is too strong. Now I see there is no word "first", only time, so I agree "China" may be removed. Sorry, I reverted without looking carefully. `'mikka 16:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Australian pubs

A recent editor made this unreferenced claim The pubs of regional Australia are playing an increasingly important role as places to dine out as part of an edit that (looking at the editors contribution history, seemed to be mainly focused on a guide to dining in Australian pubs. I was wondering if other editors with a better knowledge of the Australian restaurant sector could confirm this, and if so, whether there was a reference we could quote. Thanks -- Siobhan Hansa 22:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result was no decision due to apathy. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 05:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Hajhouse (Talk | Contribs) has suggested that the article Types of restaurants be merged into his article. Please discuss here.

comment I think the current Types of restaurant article is too long to be merged into this one. But it's also fairly low quality with no sourcing and a lot of filler in the writing. So it might be possible to merge in just the good stuff and have a reasonable article. -- SiobhanHansa 13:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is unsourced but it is a reasonable article to have. So leave it be. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:11, 2 January 2008 (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.

Proposed new 'Types of Restauants' Section.

This is just the very beginningest of ideas, with the idea being that rather than define every different type of restaurant, we might instead describe the different axis of restaurant service. This came to mind yesterday when I was reading 'Heat' by Bill Buford, and it mentioned the 3-star review of Babbo that the New York Times gave it, specifically because the food was wonderful and the service was good, but the music was loud rock and roll; so, expensive, sit-down, casual dress code, informal table setting. On the current 'types', we don't provide for that, it's not Fine dining, but it's Mario Batali's restaurant, and certainly not a casual eatery. So I patched together this idea of instead discussing the different ways of classifying restaurants. It needs a lot of work, and may well be a blind alley, but I thought I'd present it. --Thespian 12:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

This seems awfully complex and, just as the categories themselves, very subjective and in almost all cases varies considerably across cultures. I don't see how you could reference these in any meaningful way. I'd suggest it's better to provide an overview albeit a brief one.Awotter 20:48, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Restaurants are divided into types along a number of parameters, though except in unusual cases, a restaurant will only possess one distinction in each type of service. Terminology can be complex, as some terms are used in several different contexts (family-style, for example, can be a type of service or a method of presentation; formal can refer to the service or to the dress code, though they often ).

Cost of service

Restaurants can range from very low cost to quite expensive. Terms to describe this can be, 'low-cost', 'mid-range', and 'expensive', though other indicators can be used. Additionally, terms such as 'mid-range' will often be relative to the area, and will require knowledge of what constitutes the extremes of the area's prices.--Thespian 12:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Types of service

Service in restaurants can range from self service to elaborate table side service. The most basic services are fast food, deli counter-style, and cafeteria. In these styles, customers are required to approach the food preparation areas, request food, and subsequently seat themselves (if seating is provided).

Less basic services are provided at buffets, where a customer is usually seated at a table, and provided some services by a waiter, such as beverages being brought to the table. Another low-service food is called family-style, where customers are sat together (sometimes in groups with strangers). Food is brought to the table by a server on shared plates. Similar are cart-style service, where servers wheel carts around the seating area and the customer chooses as at a buffet (Chinese dim sum frequently uses this service method).

More elaborate, but more common are sit-down restaurants, with each customer selecting an item from a menu for delivery to the table by service staff. Sit-down service can range from casual to quite formal. Buffets and cart-style restaurants often provide two types of service; buffet style for brunch or lunch, and sit-down during dinner hours.--Thespian 12:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Dress code

The dress code of a restaurant often correlates to the cost of service, however, it is not uncommon to find mid-range cost restaurants that require a jacket, or have a 'no jeans' rule, or to find expensive restaurants that allow less formal attire. In North America, dress codes are short, and typically expressed as such:

• No dress code (customers have no restrictions)
• No jeans
• Jacket required
• Casual (tidy appearance but often no restrictions)
• Business casual (office wear)
• Semi-formal (suits, jackets, dresses)
• Formal

--Thespian 12:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Table settings

Additionally, in sit-down restaurants, the environment can be created by the use of formal or informal table settings.--Thespian 12:19, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Ethnicity of food

Restaurants also divide themselves along the region of the world where their food comes from, such as being a French restaurant or a Chinese restaurant. Restaurants can blend styles, or express refinements of the food in this fashion (for example, a restaurant might be 'Italian', meaning traditional Italian foods, or 'Italian-American', meaning Italian foods as interpreted in the United States for the past few decades).

Sorry ThespianI find this to be a little vague. Do you have a text that you are taking this information from? We need to get some information into the article that is properly sourced, not original research. I might have a couple hours tonight to come on and help out with th article.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 17:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Article summary

The lead sentence A restaurant is a retail establishment that serves prepared food to customers. [1] just doesn't seem right to me. That definition could include some qiki-marts where the clerk pumps the "cheese" onto your nachos and almost all pubs and bars which are different, and doesn't include non-retail (in the traditional sense of the word) establishments like club restaurants (private, invitation only or in some way restricted i.e. US Military Officer's clubs and the US Senate restaurant).

I'd like to suggest an opening sentence something along the lines of:

A restaurant is an establishment that generally prepares and serves food to order, which is eaten on the premises, though the term has been used to describe establishments that also provide take-out, food delivery services and non-institutional cafeterias or buffets... Awotter 21:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

What do you call a take out restaurant? Your change would eliminate them. Also the 'to order' is interesting for fast food where everything is frequently pre made and slapped together for you. Not really 'cooked to order'. So Fatburger would be a restaurant and McD's would not be. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Oldest Restaurant

"According to the Guinness Book of Records, the Sobrino de Botin in Madrid, Spain is the oldest restaurant in existence today. It opened in 1725."

However, the Griechenbeisl of Vienna, Austria, was established in 1447. (70.156.58.29 (talk) 02:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC))

What constitutes a Restaurant? The term didn't appear until around 1750 in France. Waiters, menus and private tables were invented in France in the late 18th century. There have been public eating establishments for a very long time, probably as old as recorded civilization, but when we say "restaurant" we usually mean something more specific. Likewise just as there have been schools for a long time, they are not the same as Universities, which have a genesis in 12th century Europe. Green Cardamom (talk) 00:54, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Food labeling regulations and Restaurant regulations

"there are general laws which should be implied on any food product: <...> All ingredients of the food must be stated under the heading 'Ingredients' and must be stated in descending order of weight. Moreover, certain ingredients such as preservatives must be identified as such by the label ‘Preservatives’,<...>"

what about food in restarants? are there any rights to allow me to know all ingredients of the food served in restaurant? for example i may have alergic reactions to some food additives or would like just to avoid some additives for other reasons. if there are such regulations, then it would be nice to have them included in the article. Raigedas (talk) 11:49, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Chefs as "artisans"

Is the line "Professional artisans of cooking are called chefs" some sort of joke? I think it should be removed. It certainly doesn't belong where it is now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.36.164.147 (talk) 19:11, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Wasted food

Do you think adding something about wasted food is good: http://www.endhunger.org/food_waste.htm Stars4change (talk) 05:29, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Italic text== el rualet ==

ristorante bar a dongo (co) sul lago di como . cucina tipica. enoteca e bar accogliente —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.35.234.170 (talk) 16:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Amarillo Texas Big Texan Steak1 2005-05-29.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Amarillo Texas Big Texan Steak1 2005-05-29.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:22, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Recent edits

Hi all. I made a bunch of changes in one go, so here's an explanation:

1. I don't think Italian is considered 'ethnic' in most places outside of Italy. Like French cuisine, it's kind of a thing of its own.
2. Besides this picture makes more sense here, and those pictures make more sense elsewhere (but I'm going to look for better photos of restaurants)
3. The Michelin Guide is extremely famous around the world, not just in Western Europe. I think whoever wrote that was possibly trying to say that it is heavily biased towards Western European cuisine, which is true, but is probably too complex an issue to really wade into here.
4. Some things in this section need to be cited; I'll start looking.
5. The end of the section has been awaiting citations for years. If we're going to mention websites, we should talk about which are most significant. I'd argue Yelp is on the list. Are there any other food review websites people know about which are significant in an encyclopedic context?

In addition, a couple other points:

1. The 'Regulations' section seems to be emphasizing the (potential) alcohol regulations with which (some) restaurants must comply, as opposed to the public health regulations which have much, much more of a direct impact on the day to day workings of a restaurant than liquor laws, which tend to be both very simple to follow, and relatively few in number
2. This article really needs some better photos.

Anyway, hope that answers any possible questions and shiz. --The Potato Hose ↘ 06:01, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Restaurant history

I think we should add some information of the history of restaurants from this site (based on the book "Drink: A Social History of America" by Andrew Barr) with the development of the restaurant in America from the colonial era where people were served cafeteria/buffet-style until hotels began serving food in courses and increased variety in menus.

The French revolution-era genesis is a lie. Pubs, taverns, and inns have served food since several centuries B.C., e.g. Greek caupona.

I've amended the reference to Ma Yu Chin's Bucket Chicken House (which I thought had to be a joke at first btw!) to say that it's claim to priority is not universally accepted. There is apparently no documentation of their claim to be found.Unsigned

The restaurant genesis, as you call it, is not a lie. Restaurants, as we know them, have existed for millenia, but the term restaurant was first used to refer to an establishment in 1765. Also, the description in the history section is wrong. The restaurant was a restorative bouillon, so it was thin, lightly seasoned, and served as a digestive aid. The restaurant establishment was medical in nature, and less about the food.131.247.152.4 19:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

"How the tables turned in 18th-century France", a history of the restaurant. While it's true food has been served to the public for a very long time, when we say "restaurant" we generally mean private tables, waiters, menus, dining room decour. All of these are inventions of 18th century France. Green Cardamom (talk) 00:47, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

The link to that article is broken. Does anyone have another link to it? I think the history of restaurant section can and should be expanded but will need to do some more reading. B Hastings (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Merger complete

  Y Merger complete. Information from Piqueteadero has been merged into this article, per the merge result at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piqueteadero. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:06, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Spam

This has no place in the article. One, it was inserted by an IP who only edited Wikipedia to spam this NPD group via references, and more importantly it's completely irrelevant. The restaurants in the United States increased one percent in a single year? That is not an appropriate level of detail for a summary style article and, in the context of this article, is trivia, at best, using a primary source, which should be avoided on Wikipedia articles. Between WP:SPAM, WP:PRIMARY, and plenty of others, there's no real cause to include this material (and this source) in the article. - Aoidh (talk) 06:48, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

(Comment)

(Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jormamies (talk • contribs) 18:35, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Please note that this comment was removed because it's a verbatim copyright violation of the source itself. - Aoidh (talk) 20:00, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

New stuff

One of our honoured members has tried to add highly relevant information to the article:

(Redacted)

I have been following for years some older member's activity sadly it is common that people remove highly relevant information without discussing about it first. I am very sorry for that these kind of situations are common in Wikipedia.

Some users seems to think that they are better than other users and will prevent them contributing to Wikipedia. I believe that we should always discuss aboout the relevance of the information and make desicions together. Many older members have also removed relevant information if it had contained typos. I believe that even in these kind of situations we can help each other and give help instead of trying to smash new members down. Some old members have also removed unsourcesd material right away, even if we can mark unsourced material first and give new members more time to look for the best sources available.

Wikipedia has many fully unsourced articles and they are left as it. I have seen many decent article bodies with relevant sources to be removed right away or by discussing about significance in a ridiculously short time of three days!

People should help each other making Wikipedia better, not allowing moderators and old members to show favoritism to older members or discriminating new members. Jormamies (talk) 18:35, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

I think the information fits very well with the brief section on USA, which stresses the size of the industry. After years of rapid growth the numbers have levelled off. Indeed I would like to see more about the economic situation. Rjensen (talk) 19:16, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Are there any third-party sources that support this information? If all we have is a primary source being spammed by a single purpose account, that's hardly cause to include it into the article. Seeing as how you were quite adamant about including this spam, I was hoping for some explanation other than "I would like to see it"; that's not cause to include it in the article. If a third-party source can be found to support the information I'd have no problem including it, but as is it comes across as overly-detailed statistics spammed across Wikipedia; if third-party sources don't think it's relevant, this article should hardly include it. - Aoidh (talk) 09:04, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I've redacted the information above because, as I said below, it's a copyright violation of the source. It is, however, still in the page's history and is the first few sentences of the source. Jormamies, even though your account wasn't even an hour old when you first posted, you've apparently been "following for years Aoidh's activity". If that was true, you'd at least have cursory knowledge of WP:BRD and WP:CV, and you'd realize that your comment is completely contrary to how Wikipedia works. I reverted the content and started a discussion about it, which is how it is supposed to be done. Turns out, however, the content was also a copyright violation, which means it has to be removed immediately, discussion or not. Instead of discussing the merits of the content, you chose to complain about my editing on Wikipedia (removing unsourced content is hardly inappropriate, and I'd love to see a diff if you're going to accuse me of "[removing] relevant information if it had contained typos"). Wildly inaccurate complaints about "favoritism" and "discrimination" are not going to make spamming Wikipedia with copyright violations suddenly appropriate behavior. I have explained why the content was removed, if you think the content belongs, explain why instead of attacking those that disagree. - Aoidh (talk) 23:27, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

The Wikipedia rule is that facts are not copyright, only the verbal expression. I rewrote the facts re numbers in 2013 using my own words and cited the reliable source, so there is no copyvio. Rjensen (talk) 23:44, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

That solves one issue, but not the primary reason the information was reverted. Where are the third-party sources showing that this is relevant? Primary sources aren't the best sources to be using in the first place, and a single year with a single data set isn't of much use if there's no context as to why that year should be mentioned instead of any other, and creates an imbalance in the article that quickly becomes unacceptable if there aren't any third-party reliable sources showing that this information is worth noting. - Aoidh (talk) 03:58, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

The text that was erased is in a section about the economics of the US restaurant industry so Aoidh main complaint that the number of restaurants today and the number of employees is not relevant is very strange, the info is exactly relevant. The reason 2013 is chosen is that is the most recent year--previously the article was using data 7 years out of date; the new data includes the old numbers and brings them up to date, which is a core Wikipedia role. I did not use any "primary source" (the primary source would be the detailed long report, and that was not used---only a secondary source --a press release --that summarized in a paragraph NPD's long report based on its annual census of the industry. NPD Group has been an industry leader in market data collection since the 1960s and is widely cited in the news media by Bloomberg Businessweek Wall Street Journal and Huffington Post etc--they treat NPD reports like reliable secondary sources so there is no controversy there. Let me complain that Aoidh has accidentally removed additional sourced info that I found myself today (ie restaurants employ 10% of all American workers). Rjensen (talk) 04:27, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to comment:

1. Press releases are not secondary sources, they're primary. (WP:PSTS)
2. The inclusion of this data borders on original research (I looked it up and chose 2013...). (WP:OR)

That being said, the inclusion of data about the industry are pertinent as are the relationship to the American economy. I would suggest looking amongst more reliable sources that would put this in context to the economy. WSJ, NYT and Nation's Restaurant News are all good places to start. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 04:41, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

let's not be silly here. "Original research" refers to studies conducted by a Wiki editor without a footnote. I guarantee that I never took a national census of restaurants in my life :) All the Wiki caveats about primary sources are ok here--we are not interpreting anything, just repeating three numbers given in the press release. As for 2013--it's the most recent data available--obviously--and that follows Wikipedia policy to keep census-like data current. Rjensen (talk) 06:13, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

It's the most recent data, but it's out of context and near-meaningless. You wrote "The number of restaurants reached 633,000 in fall 2013, as the pattern of rapid growth slowed to under 1% a year." There are a few problems with that though. What was it before it "slowed"? How slow? How rapid was the "previous growth"? There's no context or significance to those numbers, they just exist to clutter up the article. Per WP:IINFO: "merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations referenced to independent sources." It needs relevance and context, and third-party sources to help support it. Just "repeating three numbers given in the press release" doesn't do that. - Aoidh (talk) 21:55, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Type Of Restaurants

There are many differ types of restaurant concepts to choose from, when planning a new restaurant. It can be hard to decide which concept will be right for you. Before you settle on one particular concept, first consider the following: who’s your audience? What is your price range? Are you thinking formal or casual? Do you have a particular type of food in mind that you can build a brand around? Below are eight distinct types of restaurant concepts, from fast food chains to fine dining. Keep in mind that your restaurant design theme can blur the line between concepts to make it unique.

• Fast Casual:-One of the hottest trends at the moment is fast casual, which is a slightly more upscale (and therefore more expensive) than fast food.

•Family Style:-Family style dining, also known as casual style dining in the United States, offers moderately priced entrees from menus featuring a mix of classics cuisines, individualized with signature sauces, dips or other toppings cuisine.

• Fine Dining:-The term Fine Dining brings to mind all kinds of images, from crisp white table cloths to waiters in tuxedos. Fine dining, just as the name suggests, offers patrons the finest in food, service and atmosphere.

• Fast Food:-Fast food is the most familiar restaurant to most people. Chains like McDonalds and Burger King became popular in the 1950s, and helped spawn countless other concepts like Taco Bell, KFC and In-n-Out Burger. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharonmartin01 (talk • contribs) 09:54, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

This history section is a mess.

https://www.chowhound.com/post/historys-restaurants-566102 indicates ancient restaurants, as do many other articles with a simple search, https://www.thebalancesmb.com/a-history-of-the-restaurant-part-one-2888654, and there's Thermopolium; this article is written in a very post-colonialist POV. 172.58.231.49 (talk) 12:35, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

"Ristorante" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ristorante. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 19#Ristorante until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

"Ristorante" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ristorante. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 19#Ristorante until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Return to origina spelling

Thee article was begun with American spelling, not British spelling, and per Wikipedia policy should be returned to the original spelling. Thank you. SiefkinDR (talk) 13:22, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 19 October 2021 and 17 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): GAZTRONAMIC, Littlehodgee.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

North America - "Eat Out" Frequency

Under By Country/North America/United States, the following language is included: "The average person eats out five to six times weekly." The citation in the following sentence does not contain the quoted information. The information contained in citation 46 is at odds with the quoted language as 20% of any age group is the highest percentage of people who eat out three or more times a week, though this is not an average for any given week but instead a response to a poll asking for behavior that occurred in a particular week in 2016. As such, the quoted information is at the very least inconsistent with the data and at most not factual. 198.101.123.90 (talk) 20:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 200 - Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 September 2022 and 8 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Janyu150 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Janyu150 (talk) 20:49, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 200 - Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 September 2022 and 8 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Janyu150 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Rt2510 (talk) 01:35, 27 November 2022 (UTC)