Talk:The Modern Cook

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Modern Cook/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 04:37, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I am taking this. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 04:37, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Lead

• Could we expand the lead?

Done.

• Please do not keep citations here. Put the facts in the main text as well and shift the citations there.

Done.

• Just curious, do we really need to link "cook", "wafer cone" and "ice cream"?

Since it's the first mention of ice cream in cones, I think so; unlinked cook.

• I think French should be linked

Done.

Context

• Is link needed for "aristocrat"?

Maybe, but perhaps it's "common" enough.

• and for the Prince and Princess of Wales Links?

Done.

Approach

• Apart from the preface and Francatelli's advice...layout of the kitchen. Source? Or our "cite-the-book-directly" principle?

Done.

• Link for ice cream?

As above.

Contents

• Our "cite-the-book-directly" principle? I guess the same needs to be added at least in the last line of "Bills of fare"?

Done.

Illustration

• Should this be "Illustrations"?

OK, it's the same.

• All the other engravings are of completed dishes,...illustrations are not identified. Source?

Added.

• There is a full-page frontispiece of the author I don't see why we need to link the author here again

Unlinked.

Bills of fare

• The exceptional royal dinner of 30 June 18411 had sixteen entrées Wow, how does the earth look then? ;)

Fixed.

• For the numbers used, I think you can use digits for all those above 10.

Done, I think.

Contemporary

• every one of his fifty-six dishes Digits please

Done.

• are not sweet nor hot "Neither" sweet nor hot?

Done.

• George H. Ellwanger wrote in 1902 in his Pleasures of the Table --> In 1902, George H. Ellwanger wrote in his Pleasures of the Table

Fixed.

• Gastronomy could be linked

Done.

• Can we add the years for the books in this section and the next?

The editions are listed in the Publication section; reviewers are almost always commenting on the most recent edition, so I doubt there's anything to be gained here.

• No URL or anything for ref. 3?

Wikilinked.

Alright. @Chiswick Chap: You have been very quick and efficient. The article looks better now. All my issues have been addressed. I would be glad to promote this. Cheers! Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 10:34, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Super, many thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:22, 6 March 2016 (UTC)