Template:Did you know nominations/Great British Meal


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bob Amnertiopsis ∴ChatMe! 13:58, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Great British Meal

 * ... that the Great British Meal of prawn cocktail, steak and Black Forest gâteau (pictured) is claimed to have been the UK's most popular meal out during the 1980s?
 * ALT1:... that the Great British Meal (dessert pictured) is claimed to have been the UK's most popular meal out during the 1980s?
 * Reviewed: Beverly Hills 9/11 Memorial Garden
 * Comment: ALT1 keeps some air of mystery

Created by Edwardx (talk), Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 17:41, 16 June 2014 (UTC).
 * Comment: I was going to say that the first is better with all the courses, but maybe ALt1 is better, and better still with no picture at all. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:01, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: "out of the 1980's" is illiterate, simply "of the 1980's" is correct. Black Kite kite (talk) 18:33, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * It's "meal out" as in "dining out" not meal out of (from) the 1980s. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:05, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: "out of the 1980's" would certainly be illiterate, with that apostrothe. I've replaced "in" with "during". Problem solved? As for the ALT1 picture, there's every chance that when it makes the front page, it won't be the first hook, so there would be no photo anyway. Edwardx (talk) 19:30, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol question.svg I just browsed for sources and am bothered that, when you search for the title phrase "Great British Meal", the results are just as likely to be bangers and mash or fish and chips. It seems that the phrase is only used in this sense by one source - The Prawn Cocktail Years.  If you look at another source such as The Oxford Companion to Food, one sees some recognition of the menu but they don't call it the "Great British Meal".  They put it under the topic title of England which is equivalent to our English cuisine.  That topic is quite large and so a split is reasonable but we're not quite there yet, I reckon.  Here's some titles of relevant books to consider:


 * England Eats Out: A Social History of Eating Out in England from 1830 to the Present
 * Spicing up Britain: The Multicultural History of British Food
 * Food Culture in Great Britain
 * Adventures on the High Teas: In Search of Middle England
 * State of Emergency: The Way We Were: Britain, 1970-1974
 * The Sociology of the Meal
 * Food Britannia
 * When I Was a Nipper: The Way We Were in Disappearing Britain
 * The British at table, 1940-1980


 * The latter seems quite good in the way it covers the evolution of such food after WW2. For example, the way that prawn cocktail replaced tomato soup as the favourite starter. Andrew (talk) 17:22, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * That particular combination of Prawn/Steak/BFG definitely has an identity of its own that has pierced the British public consciousness as the archetypal meal out in the 60s and 70s and the sources back that up, but I agree the name is a bit of a problem. "Berni Inn Meal" is another option per here but other suggestions would be useful. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:56, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:NEO advises "In a few cases, there will be notable topics which are well-documented in reliable sources, but for which no accepted short-hand term exists. It can be tempting to employ a neologism in such a case. Instead, it is preferable to use a title that is a descriptive phrase in plain English if possible, even if this makes for a somewhat long or awkward title." This suggests that the main title be "Prawn cocktail, steak and Black Forest gâteau", even though that's a bit of a mouthful. :)  The other titles might be added in a qualified way such as "described by The Prawn Cocktail Years as the Great British Meal". Andrew (talk) 21:30, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I would prefer a more bite-size name. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I like the food pun, but I'd have to agree with Andrew that this would have to go at "Prawn cocktail, steak and Black Forest gâteau". Or you could expand it to be "Stereotypical British restaurant cuisine" or something. From the web references to The Prawn Cocktail Years it appears that that they call it "The Great British Meal Out" anyway. Belle (talk) 10:11, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * "Prawn cocktail, steak and gâteau"? Philafrenzy (talk) 11:52, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The article and hook would both be easier to digest if there were a clearer identification in the article (in both the lead and the text) of who it is that claims this was the stereotypical British experience of dining out. It is almost impossible to prove the premise that this was a stereotype, so the statement that it's a stereotype needs to be attributed. (Maybe the lead could summarize with words like "several food critics", as long as the names appear later.)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg I note that the first paragraph under "Background" is completely unsourced -- and I'm skeptical of the glib assertions in that paragraph, like "The Great British Meal out was a meal in a restaurant designed to appeal..." (was it truly "designed"? -- if so, who designed it?). --Orlady (talk) 14:44, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg All this chat and no full review yet? New enough (expanded 12 June, nom 16 June) and long enough. The original hook and ALT1 both check out online with citation #1. The hook image and article images are all free (wish I hadn't looked at all three filepages in succession, though - groo.) Spot checks did not find any copyvio or close paraphrasing. Toolserver is down so the following were fully checked, manually (these reviews are now taking hours!) No disambig links found. No problem with access to external links. The text is objective insofar as dealing with a subject with a heavy subtext of English class snobbery and in-joke irony can be, and it is neutral ditto. The text is sufficiently referenced except for the first paragraph in the Background section. However IMO this paragraph would be valid if it were at least partly referenced (see issue 3); it is necessary for non-British readers as it hints at the aforementioned subtext. The three dishes which in the right circumstances can be prepared well, were at that time mass-produced as unappetising stodge and swill for the great unwashed of Britain: appearance before substance, bulk before quality and tiresome repetition before piquant variety. That's why in due course it became yet another self-parodying joke for the Brits. Berni Inns could be said to have profited for some years by cynically "designing" this combination of three pre-existing dishes for the delectation of the unsophisticated. Issues: (1) Re the QPQ: watch your back, Edwardx - you as the reviewer have reviewed your own ALTs as OK after only the nominator has accepted them. You will need to add a comment asking an independent third party to approve them (just you asking will be sufficient to cover QPQ; it doesn't matter if no-one replies immediately). (2) Please put at least one reference into the first para of the Background section. When issues 1 and 2 are resolved, this nom should be OK. --Storye book (talk) 14:31, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Added refs. Is that better? I don't think we intended it to sound as bad as you say we have! It was of its time and no worse than what is served in many cheap and cheerful formula restaurant chains now. Philafrenzy (talk) 15:14, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Philafrenzy. Yes I agree you have been very polite about the subject - perfectly neutral! I must admit that although I got pretty sick of the stuff at the time, I did have a slice of b-f gateau at a nice pub recently, and it was delish. And that particular 80s food on a plate was certainly better than KFC in a bucket today. So yeah. @ Edwardx - just the QPQ to be sorted now. --Storye book (talk) 16:03, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg I've had another look at the QPQ and I was mistaken - my apologies, and I have struck my comments. All issues resolved. Good to go with original hook or ALT1. --Storye book (talk) 10:00, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg The issue of the title still seems to be unresolved and there's a prominent cn in the lead. I'll test the water by trying out another title and perhaps this will help us towards a conclusion. Andrew (talk) 12:07, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * What title? We don't want it bouncing around between titles. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Indeed - we need to have a settled title before the page is promoted. I started editing and immediately got an edit conflict, which indicates that the page is not stable yet. Andrew (talk) 12:27, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Well that was me putting in the reference that you asked for Andrew. It is (or was) stable before you started to change the lead Andrew... Philafrenzy (talk) 12:42, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Page title, citation and all other issues now resolved. I have amended links in both hooks to reflect title change. Good to go with original hook and ALT1 (again).