Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hamburger/archive1

Hamburger
I randomly came across this page and was very impressed. Seems to be well written. In fact the article was even cited by the Cleveland Plain Dealer as a source!  I think that shows how well of an article it was to be cited by the media. OmegaWikipedia 12:42, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. Lacks a References sections to cite the sources used for this article as required by criteria 2 of the featured article criteria. --Allen3 talk 13:03, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Refer to peer review.
 * 1) Size of lead is too large in relation to the article itself.
 * 2) Article contains unneeded fair use images.
 * 3) Wiki Cookbook link is not in the external links section.
 * 4) There's no sources (especially the etymology needs them). They need to be in a seperate references section.
 * 5) Article is missing references to popular culture (for example Supersize Me). Not comprehensive. - Mgm|(talk) 20:58, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. As per previous objectors and because of the over-specifics of the "Serving style"-section. Keeping separate sections on individual countries is not a good idea. You'll just wind up with users adding the serving style of their own country sooner or later. Revamp it into a more generalized section that describes hamburger styles in how they differ from larger cultural areas, not individual nations.
 * And what's with the promotional photos? If there are to be pics of franchise burgers, I want them to be of what the actual burgers look like, shot by Wikipedians, not corporate propaganda centers. Anyone who's ever eaten at a fast food restaurant is very aware of the fact that the photos used to display the merchendise is a shameless destortion of reality. / Peter Isotalo 12:09, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Responses Ahh, the article does have references, but I suppose they arent referenced correctly, and that they could use some more. I dont know if I'll have time to fix up the article before this FAC fails, but thanks for the comments everyone. Don't know if Supersize Me should go in this article, because that applies to all products of McDonalds (not just hamburgers) but I did expand on the cultural references. And I think the professional work better....unless you seriously want me to go and take a picture of a hamburger with my camera. OmegaWikipedia 12:19, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Omega, is snapping one a great nuisance? If it is, I can do it for you.
 * Peter Isotalo 19:29, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh no, its not a problem at all. I was just thinking that the hamburgers should presented the way they are, because even though is it marketing and I agree with you...these are the images most people are used to and I'm wondering how they'd react to not having it. But Carnildo makes a point about the image's fair use, and taking the pictures is not a problem either OmegaWikipedia 19:44, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry for not replying before the FAC was taken off the main page. But, how about using both? I know most people are aware of the discrepencies between hamburger franchise promotional fantasy and reality, but I thought it would be good to actually point this out in an article. Not overly anti-corporate, but still.
 * Peter Isotalo 17:18, 20 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Object for now. A section on references to popular culture is still needed. And I suggest you split the "Serving size" section into a separate article if you ever want this hamburger article to have a decent chance to become an FA. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 14:23, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Object—the prose needs tightening up. Just looking through the lead, I see:
 * two 'alsos' and 'specially' that need to be removed as redundant;
 * a 'generally' that should be 'typically';
 * 'very good', both of which words are weak (try 'suitable');
 * a comma that should be a semicolon, for the sake of the grammar (Plus: the text could do with a few more commas throughout).

Not good enough for a FA. Tony 04:47, 17 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Object. The images Image:Whopper TIME!.jpg and Image:Monsterthickburger.jpg are licensed under a "fair use" license.  Since it's quite possible for a Wikipedian to make a free-license replacement for these images, there's no reason to use them in this article. --Carnildo 07:01, 17 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Object. Clunky prose in many places. Also, I think the history is skewed, giving too much credit to McDonald's and not enough to White Castle, which (if I recall correctly) predates McDonalds and was quite important. If I remember right, fast food hamburgers in the U.S. were first considered somewhat suspect food, appropriate only for single men as it were, and White Castle and McDonalds turned them into acceptable family fare with their focus on cleaniless, etc. The book Fast Food Nation, though very POV, has a lot of the history of this topic. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes  (talk) 17:12, 18 October 2005 (UTC)