Talk:Em (restaurant)/GA1

GA Review

Passed. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 00:29, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Tbhotch (talk · contribs) 20:28, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula (talk · contribs) 12:35, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's eat! TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 12:35, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tbhotch: Finished. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 15:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, looks like we're done here. Off to the next one! TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 00:29, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose has been revised, making it clear and concise. No typos spotted.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead is of adequate length and summarizes article. Layout is correct per MOS:LAYOUT. Article is not bombarded with words from the WTW list. Fiction and list incorporation policies do not apply.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	There is a reference section. No bare URLs spotted.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Time magazine and many other food magazines used in the article are reliable.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Spotchecking proves there is no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig shows the top result is at a 13.8% similarity, meaning that there are little copyright violations.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	The restaurant's description, menu, history, and reception are written about - material that is adequate for a restaurant article.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article does not go off topic.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article is neutral (does not try to promote the restaurant by using weasel words or puffery).
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article is stable; development is at a steady pace.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Logo has valid fair use rationale. Restaurant photo is correctly licensed.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Logo and physical location images are relevant. Captions are suitable.
	7. Overall assessment.	You gotta love restaurant articles on Wikipedia. They may make you hungry!

Quickfail?

Y Article is stable.
Y First GA review, so no errors from previous GA reviews to note.
Y Copyvio according to Earwig is pristine.
Y No cleanup banners or citation needed tags spotted.
Everything's good to go! Starting the review...

Infobox and images

The restaurant's logo seems like it could fall under PD-shape, as the logo is composed of a white background and a font I'm pretty sure is copyright-free.
- Comment by non-nominator: I uploaded the logo under fair use, before seeing another version (of poor quality) already exists at Wikimedia Commons. I agree, someone will likely transfer the logo file to Commons, but this should not be held against GA promotion, IMO. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:30, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll let it slide; this isn't covered by the GA criteria. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 14:36, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like Thanks! --Another Believer _(Talk) 14:38, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can't really see the numbers that well. Would "brown door" and "blue door" work?
Could use an indoor image
Other than that, the images here are licensed and pair well with the article's content.

Lead

~~mixed~~ with
Link full-course dinner somewhere?
I feel as though "Food experts" seems like an informal term for "reviewers"
Why was the name shortened?

Description

in the evening
and it has space for 52 diners -> "...with space for 52 seats."
~~Does "diner" mean the person who's eating? Normally I'd say "customer", but you can leave it if you want.~~ If I'm not mistaken, does the term refer to the restaurant?
to choose the plates to serve.
The card menu is updated weekly, with the restaurant offering daily options; while whereas the latter is replaced every three months. -> "The card menu is updated weekly, and daily options alongside the menu are replaced every three months."
Diners who choose
are placed in -> "are 'seated' in?"
at ~~the~~ surrounding tables
~~Would like a better description of the menu (like what dishes are served) rather than a one sentence description about what cuisine the business serves (if sources can be found)~~ Has been done.

@TrademarkedTWOrantula: Thank you for the review.

Regarding the logo, I moved it to Commons. I was waiting for someone with SVG who could re-create it.
Regarding the entrances, the layout is weird basing myself on photos found on Google. The restaurant is legally at #133, but reviewing the photos, I found one that showed a cook there, so it seems to be the kitchen itself. I honestly thought it was on the second floor, as a stereotypical kitchen wall can be seen on the second floor. The restaurant is actually located at the black door; it cannot be immediately seen in that picture, but since Tonalá 133 is where the restaurant is supposed to be, I didn't take the picture there. I am planning to go there and take an actual picture of the restaurant itself, but since it is open Thursdays to Sundays after 5:30 pm, I will take pictures of other things throughout the city during the afternoon and I'll go there in the evening because I live 100 minutes away from the restaurant. It will be raining this weekend, so I am unable to determine when I will go and take pictures.
Regarding the restaurant's inside pictures, since reservations are required, I doubt I'll be allowed to access the facilities.
Regarding the name, Lucho only said he did it due to the Covid pandemic, so I assume he wanted to restart.
Regarding the menu, it changes every now and then, so anything the sources have said about them is no longer on the menu. Even the writer in Time Out said it (and many reviewers in other reviews of other similar restaurants I've been working at): "It is highly likely that the food described below will never happen again. The menu is printed daily and the rotation among ingredients is inescapable (and victorious)." As an example, at Pujol (restaurant), I did mention two dishes, because the baby corn and the mole are the only consistent plates the restaurant serves. Anything else is replaced eventually. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 17:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To complement, if it is required, I can also mention that when the meal was presented, A, B, or C gave a description of it. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 17:25, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a paragraph. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:03, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Description (continued)

Gonna do some copyediting myself. I'll note any confusing material here.
made with a metate - Is it "a metate" or just "metate"?
dark chocolate made with a metate filled with caramel and sea salt, topped with konbu ice cream. - I find this confusing to read through. Perhaps you could make this a separate sentence?

I decided to remove the metate and rephrase it to "sea salt and caramel-filled dark chocolate, with konbu ice cream on top."

Regarding the constant changes to the menu, Martínez considers that "it is the spark that keeps the mystery alive" and that the ingredients reflect and adapt to the times. - One: We could move this to the first description paragraph. Two: Rephrase to something like, "Commenting on the menu's constant changes, Martinez states it is because it 'keeps the mystery alive' and so that in-season ingredients can be used."

Done

History

"trained" -> "worked"

Done

Em was named after Martínez's daughter. - Would prefer a full name of the daughter.

I reworded a few sentences

The restaurant's style was planned by him and his associate, Ebo Kobayashi, along with the Japanese designer Kanako Ishida, with materials that feature copper, quarry and marble. -> "He and his associate, Ebo Kobayashi, planned the restaurant's design ("style"? "layout"?) with Japanese designer Kanako Ishida, implementing materials featuring copper, quarry, and marble."

Changed

but it was later renamed and relocated due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the food industry. It was relocated to Tonalá Street, Colonia Roma, which was once home to Máximo Bistrot. -> "but due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the food industry, it was renamed to Em and relocated to Tonalá Street, Colonia Roma, previously housing Máximo Bistrot."

Reworded

Clarification question: The entire reason he opened a bar upstairs was because he didn't want to be like other Mexican restaurants?

I moved that paragraph to an earlier location

Reception and recognition

Why is there a "sic" template in Barberena's quote?

Because the restaurant was named Emilia, not Emília

Follow-up point: The quote could use some shortening. (this is optional though, the copyright violation scores are pretty low, so I don't think much work is needed to be done in that area)

Paraphrased

Should quote the word "amusing"

Quoted as the original

"wrote for" -> "of"
Reworded
"origins in the chef's home state of Veracruz translate into dishes that surprise with their elegance and simplicity" -> ...the chef's dishes "surprise with their elegance and simplicity". (again, this is optional)
Reworded
A writer for El Universal - Who?

Unknown, it simply says "Redacción El Universal"

A writer for El Universal enjoyed the experience except for the flavors, which he found to be intense. -> "A writer for El Universal found the experience enjoyable and the flavors intense."
Reworded
Never heard of Caras or El Universal. Are they reliable?

Caras is a magazine published by Editorial Televisa; El Universal is the oldest Mexican newspaper

Should link List of Michelin starred restaurants in Mexico again in this section (and nice work getting it to FL status, too!). Could link to "18 restaurants".

Thanks. I linked it to the country

Em received one star—meaning "high-quality cooking, worth a stop". - Not sure if it's relevant to explain the meaning of a Michelin star. Seems choppy IMO.

The general audience might not know the meaning of the stars. Many people mistakenly believe that they are a synonym for the top restaurants rather than their intended travel guide meaning.

Could cut "so no need to fret" part in Michelin Guide quote

Removed

Overall a well-organized and -written section. Nice work!

Thanks

Couldn't we call this section "reception" by itself?

Reworded

Spotchecking

Gonna spotcheck three sources.
#2 Y Y N - Didn't really describe the restaurant as "amusing"

Quoted as per the cited source. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 22:28, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

#7 Y
#8 Y

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.