Talk:Gastronationalism

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anthropology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

History

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

astroturfing?

Hey, @ConstantPlancks. What was the concern w/re these edits? I added those here. valereee (talk) 22:16, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Astroturfing in the sense that his name is coming up in articles and places where it doesn't appear to have particular notability. For example: New York University professor Fabio Parasecoli has defined food as an expression of identity. is a red linked opinion with no value add. We are all aware there is Italian food, French Cuisine, Chinese food, etc, etc. If I made the same generic statement on my talk page, it isn't particularly insightful nor is my observation notable. That generic sentence is the only sentence attributed solely to Parasecoli. That reference (to a magazine article, not academic) is then sprinkled as a second or third source for other sentences. or example, it's next used to cite Sociologist Michaela DeSoucey in 2010 described the concept of gastronationalism as the use of food and its history, production, control, and consumption as a way of promoting nationalism. even though we have citations to TWO DeSoucey publications. Parasecoli is not a reliable source for DeSoucey quotes when we have tertiary sources that published DeSoucey. Lastly, that same source is used in the Feta section to support Feta was before 1999 used only by Greek producers. During the 1990s, Denmark and Germany challenged the labelling, arguing that the word 'feta' was Italian and that other EU countries shared climate and geography with parts of Greece and should be permitted to label their feta-style cheeses as Feta.. There is already a source for that dispute [1]. Finally, The Borgen Project is a political advocacy organization and citing it for facts is problematic. ConstantPlancks (talk) 02:59, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A source isn't required to have notability. It is required to be reliable. And you're objecting to using two sources to support an assertion? valereee (talk) 10:51, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm objecting to using The Borgen Project as a source. It's not reliable and it's unneeded. WP is not an advertising vehicle for political advocacy. Removing it is policy. Removing it as a source didn't change content because it was a) trivial and b) duplicative. ConstantPlancks (talk) 15:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At AN you said On the talk pages where I removed things, the consensus appears to be the removals were justified. I do not see anyone else commenting here. You also, btw, said that you hadn't removed content. You did remove content. I'd prefer not to discuss content at AN, as that's not what we do there. But misrepresenting the situation is a behavioral issue, which we do deal with at AN/I. Please don't misrepresent what is happening. There is no consensus here, and you did remove content. valereee (talk) 22:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]