Talk:Phantom Gourmet

Phantom Flawed Link
Removed the following external link Phantom Flawed, blog criticizing The Phantom Gourmet

While funny, a closer look at "Phantom Flawed, blog criticizing The Phantom Gourmet" has no relevance to the article. The main problem is that the blog is plays more to (if it's not already) parody than actual fact. Basically it's more a kin to the Onion than actually criticism. They do not allow negative feedback on the restaurants they feature on the site. Pretty bias if you ask me, therefore, I wouldn't put too much emphises on what the Phantom's food palet is. --GrashDaStampede (talk) 16:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Very good article! I'm a fan of the show, and I've been thinking about writing such an article for a while. - XX55XX

Added a section on the Andelmans, since they're such a big part of the show. Let me know if it should stay.

I was a fan of the show until I saw the brothers at Emma's pub and pizza in Norton, MA. sitting at the bar drinking with the owner and overheard them talking about the cost of about 40 grand to do a live show from there. You can't be a food critic when you are getting paid priase a restaurant that just paid you to do so. Wish I came with this scam years ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.74.221.9 (talk) 12:10, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Restaurantica
There's some jerk on restaurantica.com who calls himself the "Phantom Gourmet" who types in all caps an begins most reviews with "THE PHANTOM WAS LEFT UNATTENDED BY THE SNOBBY HOSTESS". Just wondering if this is worth a mention.

Typo?
"Phan-tastic Dining (~90-100) Gourmet Greatness (~80-100) Phantom Approved (~75-80) Phantom Mezza Mezza (~65-75) Phantom Flawed (~70 and below)"

I have a feeling that the Gourmet Greatness category should be from ~80-90, but I can't prove it. It just seems to keep everything symmetrical and adding up. Hoping author will check. Amity150 04:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

NPOV clear?
Just looked at this article. It looks to me like the NPOV problem has been cleared up. I was thinking avout removing that tag, but adding a refimprove tag. Any thoughts?--Cube lurker (talk) 16:49, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No comments so i'm going to go ahead.--Cube lurker (talk) 15:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

The show is a nothing more than a program-length commercial, indended to promote the customers of the Andelmans' video production company. The so-called "reviews" are largely indistinguishable from the actual admitted advertisements, which are all produced by the same company. The production company actually buys airtime from WBZ to air the show, rather than being paid for the show. Any claim that these are actual "reviews" is decidedly NPOV. The always-favorable reviews merely recycle the stock boilerplate decriptions, usually focussing on "ridiculous" or "enormous" or "gargantuan" serving sizes, while displaying closups of a thick layer of grease that might conceal some actual food, but more likely, just another layer of vaseline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.154.225.152 (talk) 21:15, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

kids food
I get out an"sample" but seriously, kids menu sucks! Most of us are single parents trying to stretch a Buck. Texas road house,, big NO,can you come up with a "budget  fun".? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1000:B008:3947:0:0:0:104 (talk) 05:43, 21 October 2012 (UTC)