On May 15, 2004, at 8:38 AM, Daniel P.B.Smith wrote:
It's a question of degree. You, for example, acknowledge the legitimacy of including "some famous ones." I'd be interested in knowing which ones you feel qualify.
My position is that:
1) a recipe can be used explicitly to illustrate a food if most recipes are similar to it, or
2) a recipe can be included when it is *the* recipe (this only applies, of course, to a recipe worthy of note).
Some have said that the condition for #2 is inherently POV. I agree, but would cite any decision on what is Wikipedia-worthy (as in the old original-research debate) as precedent.
On May 15, 2004, at 12:30 PM, Stan Shebs wrote:
Auntie B's recipe is not encyclopedic for the same reason that Auntie B herself isn't, there's just not much to say, but it would make a fine "illustration" for the chocolate cake article:
'''Chocolate cake''' is [[cake]] containing [[chocolate]]. First mentioned in a Dutch cookbook of 1675, [etc].
The following recipe is from Fannie Farmer ca 1921:
<recipe1>
A more modern recipe:
<recipe2>
This I would agree with, provided the recipes were truly representative. This is a judgment call.
Peter
-- ---<>--- -- A house without walls cannot fall. Help build the world's largest encyclopedia at Wikipedia.org -- ---<>--- --