Talk:El Modelo

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because... this restaurant has been covered in multiple magazines, newspapers, and websites; from within its home state and elsewhere. It is extremely important to the history of New Mexican cuisine, and its restaurant culture.
 * Another thing, this probably doesn't qualify for speedy deletion, since there is a clear listing of a recognition. The article is not an advertisement, its a stub with most of the sources available not completely incorporated. --Smile Lee (talk) 08:49, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Contested CSD.--180.172.239.231 (talk) 12:00, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Sources.
This is a blog. Garduño is not a professional writer, despite having been interviewed in a local paper about his blog. This is a tumblr of a professional writer who's sharing personal tid-bits without any editorial oversight. Although both have written about food, neither Gil Garduño nor Andrew Romano are recognized experts who's opinions can stand on their own. Both are WP:SPS and should be avoided. Emphasizing Romano's other jobs in the 'publisher' field is implying that his tumblr post is in some way endorsed by Newsweek or Daily Beast, which is false. Grayfell (talk) 10:49, 30 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I completely agree with your statement about Newsweek or Daily Beast being mentioned as possibly being misinterpreted. I do believe that this source is reliable, he's not making absurd claims, he's sharing opinions in a coherent manner; while he details other relavant information about the topic.
 * I heavily disagree with your statements about Gil Garduño "Self-published material may sometimes be acceptable when its author is an established expert whose work in the relevant field has been published by reliable third-party publications." Which completely goes for Gil Garduño, his views widely well regarded, see below. Smile Lee (talk) 11:09, 30 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for removing the 'publisher' bit, it was really bugging me. I'm not questioning the personal competence of either of the sources. I don't really think we should be relying on our own interpretations of such things, though. The whole point of having guidelines about WP:RS is that we do not have to personally argue for or against the absurdity or coherence of each source. Sources should be held to standards that are independent of Wikipedia's editors. Of course, this is a good example of why that's easier-said-than-done. Grayfell (talk) 21:17, 30 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Oh, I completely agree, I'm not trying to indicate that your interpretation of them is wrong. I'm actually glad that we're discussing this, thus far the coverage on Wikipedia from New Mexico arts, cuisine, and culture is abysmal at best, us debating this will open the doors for expanding the understanding and coverage on Wikipedia of New Mexican arts and culture. Smile Lee (talk) 01:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Well said. Personally, I'm strict in my interpretation of GNG, especially for businesses, but improving the quality of coverage for these topics is a commendable goal. NM restaurants, and restaurants in general, seem to be held to a mish-mash of conflicting standards, and this one is much better sourced than many others. I fear this makes my !vote seem somewhat petty, but my hope is that the topic is held to the high standards which it deserves. Grayfell (talk) 02:57, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Your vote isn't petty at all, it raised several important points... that I hope I'm addressing. There's a list of needed articles on Wikiproject New Mexico that I'm attempting to fill out. And I would honestly like to enlist discerning editors, like you, so that way we can properly cover this topic without resulting to every run-of-the-mill place. I have several favorite food places around here, that DO NOT pass as notable, and I would never create an article about them ("Golden Star - Chinese Gourmet Express!" and "Smoothielicious Cottonwood" yummy). And, as for your Gil Garduño comment below, his reviews are regarded for their non-biased in-depth coverage, and not as reaction pieces, that's part of what makes his articles a great resource for foodies. Smile Lee (talk) 06:55, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


 * (It's been a while since I've been to NM, is "2000 Vietnam" still around? Oh, that soup...) I confess I am not as knowledgeable about notability guidelines for restaurants as I should be if I'm going to be diving into it head first like this. Looking into it a little closer tells me this has been exhaustively discussed before. It's all over the place, with some saying that even a Michelin Star needs additional secondary sources, and a handful saying that any article-length review is enough. A big part of the problem that keeps being mentioned, without any real solution being presented, is that unlike pretty much all other businesses, restaurants have their own section in newspapers. Counting weekly alternatives (like Alibi), reputable websites, business journals, etc, etc, there are a very large number of professionally written reviews being generated every year. There is no agreed upon criteria for what counts as routine and what doesn't. Some are written by 'reviewers' and some by 'critics', and in practice, that seems like an absurdly fine distinction to be making. One thing that seems to be mostly agreed upon is that the mere existence of a review in a local publication is not enough to establish notability.


 * With that in mind, it's hard to properly gauge Garduño's blog as a source of notability. The sources at Gil’s Thrilling (And Filling) Blog certainly help, and kudos to you for that. As it stand right now, I would have no problem quoting from a review by Garduño in a 'reception' section... but I'm still reluctant to fully accept it as an indicator of notability. I dunno. Grayfell (talk) 08:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


 * That's fair enough, I would be reluctant to use a blog as a notability indicator. I am inclined to accept this blog as one though, only due to the facts that it covers its subject's in-depth, and it is widely regarded by foodies, restaurateurs, and is referred to as a reference by reputable sources. I've actually been very interested in what you said about notability being "all over the place", for these types of subjects, User:Smile Lee/Notability (specific), it was originally going to be "regions without world cities" but its become broader. It's no where near being ready to be proposed, but I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Before its ready to be proposed I'll ask for your opinions on tweaks and the like. Smile Lee (talk) 02:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

SPS issue
Andrew Romano's blog states "I’m a senior writer for The Daily Beast who spent the previous nine years at The Magazine Formerly Known as Newsweek. I’m also a contributing writer for Bloomberg Pursuits. I report on culture, design, politics, and tacos from Los Angeles, where I live with my wife and cat. My 2008 campaign blog, Stumper, won MINOnline’s Best Consumer Blog award and was cited as one of the cycle’s best news blogs by both Editor & Publisher and the Deadline Club of New York."

Gil Garduño's blog states that Gourmet (magazine), Jane and Michael Stern, Chowhound, Food Network, and others, have regarded him as an expert in this field. He has also been interviewed by The Weekly Alibi, meaning he is widely regarded by professionals in this field both local and national. Smile Lee (talk) 10:56, 30 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Do we have a secondary source describing Romano as an expert on food? His food-related writing seems like it's almost an afterthought.


 * As for Garduño, having his blog be mentioned by professionals isn't really cutting it for me. This seems like more of a reflection on the popularity of the blog than the reliability of it. There are a ton of very popular blogs espousing the entire spectrum of opinions on everything. If we're saying something is critically acclaimed, we need to be able to explain who those critics are to avoid it being a peacock thing, and in this case, doing so would instantly become undue weight. If there were enough sources out there for Garduño to have his own article, we could mention his review in a reception section, maybe, but that's another issue.


 * The underlying problem I have with this is that being an old and popular (and delicious) restaurant doesn't seem noteworthy. The two "best-of" lists look impressive, but I think they are actually pretty routine. If this place is more than just a beloved local establishment, it needs more than a couple of borderline-SPS reviews to explain this. Grayfell (talk) 20:25, 30 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I like to think of notability like a puzzle. Being old, popular, and in a historic neighborhood, are minor pieces to the notability puzzle in this case. Alibi, Gil, and AR's blog constitute in-depth secondary coverage; the Alibi being unquestionably a reliable source. Albuquerque Journal, USAToday, and Travel + Leisure indicate some level of local and/or national importance. The travel guides and American Culinary Federation only serve to indicate that the restaurant has been recommended by people interested in this area or field. Smile Lee (talk) 01:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)