Talk:Timeline of the burrito

Burro meat

This newspaper article from 1917 states that burro meat was "toothsome and succulent". --Dwchin (talk) 09:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Some of the bullets in this article defy notability

It might seem to some that several of the items on the time line defy creditable notibility. Just because something makes it into a local newspaper doesn't mean it's a notable member of this timeline. I would like to suggest a review of the items on this article with an eye to important events. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 20:07, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Could you list the problems ones below? Viriditas (talk) 20:44, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

The entire 2007 list of entries to start with.

Mar: Chipotle Mexican Grill starts "Don't Stand in Line " online burrito ordering system[22]

Jun: Ryan Goff gets prison term for Taco Bell burrito extortion"[23][24]

Jul 29: Moe's Southwest Grill (FL) starts annual competitive burrito eating contest[25]

Rosemary Gonzales arrested for smuggling drugs inside Taco Bell burrito

Burritophile.com launches

Freebirds World Burrito (TX) starts online orders

etc etc etc. That's just the 21st century entries. The fact that this article is so heavily loaded with this nonsense tempts me to tag it as AfD. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 22:44, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

It is not nonsense, but someone got carried away and added non-notable data points. Please remove them. Viriditas (talk) 23:34, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Mission begun...more edits to come. Going to let it rest for a week or so to let everyone else interested in this article catch up with the changes. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 19:47, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

===Questionable items===

Can someone comment with sources that show how these items are relevent to Timeline of the burrito?

1923 Alejandro Borquez opens Sonora cafe in Los Angeles (later renamed El Cholo Spanish Cafe) burrito on the menu is listed as being introduced in 1977

1934 Restaurente del Bol Corona opens in Tijuana, Mexico.

1949 Restaurant Xochimilco opens in Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico

1965 Mi Rancho market sells burritos in the deli in SF

1973 La Taqueria opens in SF

These are just resturants. I've not found any link for their notable contribution to the burrito history.

— fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 20:11, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I disagree with many of your deletions. "These are just restaurants" is not a reason to delete them. They are notable in history of the cuisine of California, in this case, burritos. These restaurants are in fact notable, and I'm restoring the entries. You cannot have a "history of the burrito" without these entries, so I'm a bit confused by your argument for removal. Judging by your comments, you seem to be taking exception with the lack of context since you don't see how they are important to the history of the burrito. In that case, the entries require expansion, not deletion. I hope you understand this point. In other words, just because you don't understand why they are important, doesn't mean they require deletion, just the opposite in fact. Viriditas (talk) 07:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

It is obvious that I didn't make these edits right away. I appreciate your entry into this disucssion now. As noted above, the question has been open for awhile, so I acted on it in good faith without any further input at the time. However, the fact that I cannot determine the notability is representative that someone else not familiar with the subject will not be able to either. We should work to establish notability quickly, otherwise, I'm not sure that many of these entries have any value. I ask for creditable sources. Menus from a resturant not creditable. The number one question I have for the 1923 item is this: Why is the fact that this resturant's opening and serving burritos notable? If this can be answered in the main burrito article, then maybe we can link to that location within the entry? — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 16:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I answered this question with an edit to the article regarding the opinion of food historian Andrew F. Smith.[1] Please note that you asked this question about relevance at 20:11, 27 October 2010 (UTC) and I answered it in a series of edits beginning at 08:43, 10 November 2010. After clarifying the credibility of this source, you repeated the same question at 16:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC) above. This is becoming a pattern in this discusion. You ask a question, you are given an answer, and not liking the answer, you continue to ask the same question over and over until you get the answer you want. This kind of behavior is classified as tendentious editing and cannot continue. Viriditas (talk) 23:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Additionally, I will continue to say that local events are note notable enough for any timeline. The fact that a burrito was made in honor of Elvis is completely unnotable for wikipedia since anyone can do this at any time. It doesn't really matter if the story made a local paper. Its a bit like having articles on local bands or the results of local senior shuffle board leagues. So, these items need to be seriously reconsideration. I will repeat my earlier statement in different words. There's a lot of fluff in this article that just doesn't belong on wikipedia. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 17:05, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Let's take a look at the Elvis stuff: "In honor of Elvis Presley, Taco Villa offers peanut butter and banana burritos." This was published in the Odessa American. In terms of food history, this burrito variety appears unique, created to honor Elvis Presley by the Mexican fast food restaurant chain Taco Villa. Taco Villa is a notable restaurant chain and Elvis Presley is a notable entertainer. I don't see what a "local paper" has to do with this. This is a "in popular culture" item, which is sourced. We know, for example, that in popular culture, Elvis is associated with the peanut butter, banana and bacon sandwich. In fact, according to that sourced article, "books on Elvis Presley's favorite foods and culinary tastes, as well as other published reports on his taste for peanut butter and banana sandwiches with or without bacon, have made the sandwich widely associated with Presley." So, we see that this variety already has notability. Next, we see that a notable restaurant, Taco Villa, is paying homage to Elvis by using this notable variety in a burrito. So we see that the person (Elvis), the variety (PB&B), and the restaurant (Taco Villa) are all notable, regardless of the source being a "local paper". But, let's take a look at this local paper: The Odessa American was founded in 1940, and is a 20,000+ circulation newspaper serving a population of 90,000 in an 18 county region in West Texas. It won the Pulitzer Prize in 1988. It is owned by "Freedom Communications, headquartered in Irvine, Calif...The company publishes more than 70 news publications with a combined circulation of more than one million subscribers. The Broadcast Division includes eight television stations: five CBS and three ABC network affiliates." In other words, this is a reliable source covering a notable topic. It should be noted that the reason this is appropriately covered in the Odessa American, is because the Taco Villa chain was founded in Odessa, Texas. So, we would not only expect the news department at Odessa American to cover this story, but we would depend on it based on their geographical location. Viriditas (talk) 19:50, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

For example, there's a massive SO-WHAT? entry:

'Charles Hodgkins begins gathering data from 170 taquerias in San Francisco for Burritoeater.com' How is this entry significant to the history of the burrito? The results of this search MIGHT present notable facts, but stating that start of the search itself is notable is very silly. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 17:12, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Charles Hodgkins is a notable food writer from California who is employed by the California Culinary Academy. He is also the creator of burritoeater.com, whose data he used to publish in the San Francisco Bay Guardian and Synthesis, and whose efforts were covered by San Francisco Chronicle (4/2/06), The New York Times (11/14/05), The Los Angeles Times (1/4/06), Gelf Magazine (2/22/06), in addition to others. International travel guide publisher Rough Guides has also published or mentioned his work. Lonely Planet's California Trips also mentions his achievements as a burrito expert on four separate pages.[2] Viriditas (talk) 19:20, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

I think I'm tending to agree with fcsuper on this. There's nothing to show why most of the entries here are part of the burrito's history. Was Restaurant Xochimilco the first restaurant to offer a burrito? To call it a burrito? To bring it to a wider audience? All a reader knows is that some restaurant opened in Sonora - there's no context. And that's true for most of the entries. "Anna's Taqueria opens in Brookline, MA"? Who cares? Was it the first burrito-selling place in New England? The first chain restaurant? You get the picture. I understand the difficulty in reliably sourcing a non-academic topic like the burrito, but there at least needs to be context and some notability to put something in the timeline. I'd support the removal of non-notable entries, adding context to others where appropriate, and depending on how much is left, merging the rest to the main burrito page (which does need help in the history section). Dohn joe (talk) 19:10, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

It's possible that there is an entry or two that were added by someone unfamiliar with inclusion criteria, but many of this stuff is already referenced and notable. I'll remove non-notable items as I find them, but many of the examples Fcsuper and yourself offer above (El Cholo and Restaurant Xochimilco) have been covered in RS, for example by notable food historian Andrew F. Smith and writer Peter Fox. Viriditas (talk) 19:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

That's fine. I'm not saying that Xochimilco isn't notable or reliably sourced - my main point is about the lack of context in the timeline. If the entry said something like "Early burrito purveyor Restaurant Xochimilco opens in Hermosillo", I'd be fine with that. But naked facts aren't very helpful to the average reader - that's all I'm trying to say. Dohn joe (talk) 19:48, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

That's a very valid point, and I agree with it, as I've stated on Fcsuper's talk page. I originally planned to write the history section, and use the timeline to supplement it. Perhaps you could help. Viriditas (talk) 19:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'm not interested in doing a line-by-line vote for each point on the timeline. Any point that does not have such context should be removed now. You can add them back as you are able to establish the context. This, in my view, is more proper to make sure people can understand this article. Right now, this just looks like a random list of selected events. I'm going to remove Elvis because that is way too localized and doesn't have an impact on burrito history unless there is a reliable source that explains how the Elvis burrito has impacted burrito history. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 16:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I think we have a failure to communicate. "Merging" means attempting to move this information into the burrito article, not deleting. That you personally feel that this information is not important is in dispute. As I said above with citations, these appear to be notable and important. Viriditas (talk) 19:49, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

The only failure in communication is the fact that you keep ignoring me and the other commenter, and that you have changed your mind about removing any material from this aritlce. The fact that you have to come up with an extreneous explanation for why a local newspaper somehow provides notability on the history of an international topic doesn't mean that the topic magically becomes notable from a NPOV. ...and that's the biggest problem. If we merge these articles, then that will mean removing most of the information on this page. Are you ready for that? If so, then please come up with the paragraph or two that this article would be condensed down to. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 22:22, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I haven't ignored a single editor or point, and I've responded to all of them. On the other hand, you just deleted an item that I discussed with no reply on that subject by you, and you deleted another item without discussion. I'm afraid it is you who he needs to join the discussion and begin explaining your reasons. I've also questioned your edit summary rationales which I find lacking. You are welcome to help with the merge, or to do further research on the topic, but deleting items you don't like is not acceptable. Feel free to continue the discussion, focusing on the items, list guidelines, and their relevance to the topic, rather than what you personally dislike. I notice in the above section regarding the opinion of food historian Andrew F. Smith, the use of the Odessa American as a source about Elvis and burritos, and in the below section about Charles Hodgkins, you have repeated questions that have already been answered. That's three separate incidents where you were given an answer and refuse to accept it or challenge it on its own merits. Instead you say, "I don't like it". Repeatedly asking the same question over and over while ignoring the answers given to you is generally described as tendentious editing. I would suggest that you take a step back, consult the answers and responses that you have been given, and think about them for a moment. Lastly, you've made many claims above that just don't hold water. You decry the use of regional sources because you claim this is an international topic, but it is the other way around. It was explained to you that the regional sources were used because this is a regional topic: The Odessa American appropriately covered the restaurant Taco Villa because it is the major newspaper based in that area. You also ignored that point and repeated your objection again. This can't continue. Viriditas (talk) 23:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Questionable items that need addressing in 21st Century section:

2003

Charles Hodgkins begins gathering data from 170 taquerias in San Francisco for Burritoeater.com[18][19] How is this an actual historical point? I might as well add when I found the Timeline of Burrito wikipedia article. That's just about as significant. This also appears to be recentism from that period.

Notable. This was already answered above at 19:20, 10 November 2010 (UTC). Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

2005

Burritophile.com launches

This is straight up an ad for that site. How many burrito websites exist? Was it the first one (and even if it was, why is that important in a sea of millions of websites about every topic on the planet)? Did it change the course of burrito history?

This may or may not be notable. Further research is needed. Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Freebirds World Burrito (TX) starts online orders

This is another add. See previous comments about burritophile.com

This is not an "ad". No idea if online orders is notable, but no objection to removal. Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

May: A Clovis, New Mexico Middle school student creates a 30-inch burrito filled with steak, guacamole, lettuce, salsa and jalapeños for an extra-credit assignment project. The large, foil-wrapped burrito is mistaken as a weapon, and armed police officers are sent in, closing down streets and locking down the school.[20]

This appears to be recentism from 2005. This also is questionable as to its impact on burrito history. Did they break a record of some sort?

No objection to removal. Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Jul: Rubio's (CA) Lobster Burrito lawsuit. Rubio's is accused of selling a "lobster burrito" that contains langostino meat from the squat lobster, an edible crustacean but not a lobster, raising questions about labeling lobster meat.

There thousands of lawsuits each year for false advertising. This is another point that appears to be recentism from 2005. Did the FDA force Rubios to stop selling burritos? Did this cause some sort of industry shift in burrito marketing or sales?

This was apparently a notable lawsuit, so I would leave it for now. More discussion is needed. Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

2006

Mar: Chipotle Mexican Grill starts "Don't Stand in Line " online burrito ordering system

Marketing programs start and stop all the time. Anyone remember Lucky's Three's-a-crowd promotion? This is recentism from 2006 in the extreme.

No objection to removal. Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Jun: Ryan Goff gets prison term for Taco Bell burrito extortion"[25][26]

Crimes happen everyday in everyway imaginable. This is also recentism from 2006.

No objection to removal, but a news item from 2006 is not "recentism". Please familiarize yourself with how we use the term here. Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Jul 29: Moe's Southwest Grill (FL) starts annual competitive burrito eating contest[27]

Is this the first or most popular contest?

Apparently notable. I would suggest looking at the sources or doing more research on the topic. Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Rosemary Gonzales arrested for smuggling drugs inside Taco Bell burrito

See my previous crime comment

This should be removed. Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

2007

Jul: Charles Hodgkins completes his 495th burrito review

This is not a point of time. It's a personal acheivement of one particular individual that doesn't seem all that important even at the time.

This apparently was added by an IP and should be removed. Viriditas (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

— fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 16:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Viriditas, I am baffled by your protectionism of this article. You do not own this article, nor are you an authority on this topic to make your own judgements. Stop reverting good faith edits that improve this article. Wikipedia users are not required to discuss removal of violations. Any unsourced information may be removed without discussion. Poorly referenced information can also be removed, though talking is considered good manners. I've tried to talk, but really haven't got anywhere with you. At first you say that you are OK with deleting items, but every time I remove questionable items, you revert and wonder what's going on. I'm really not in the mode to go through a line by line approval vote. You can add back any details that you can provide justification for when such exists. Until that time, it does not belong on Wikipedia. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 21:57, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

From my talk page:"Continuing to delete items from a list without trying to merge them per the discussion on the talk page is not helpful. One of the items you recently deleted was discussed while the other was not. Further, the rationale you provided in the edit summary was somewhat strange, as the date of publication is used as a historical data point on Wikipedia, such as in discipline by year lists. Here, we are talking about the food history of the burrito. If you are willing to help research and write the history section of the burrito article, great, otherwise, these edits are not helpful. Please remember that there is no strict, black and white rule that we use when we determine the merit of inclusion, but rather a flexible, shades of gray approach that requires looking at the big picture. It may help to use the talk page to describe your own vision of the timeline article, using other lists as support. Viriditas"

Viriditas, it's almost as though you haven't read anyone else's comments. It's like going in circles. First you say to delete unimportant additions, but when such are removed you revert with very poor or no explanation. I don't need to help you go through line by line. If the information is not up to par to be included, then it shouldn't be included UNTIL such qualification exists. You spurious protectionism of this article brings me to the point of again considering a full AfD since notiability of the topic itself (that of a timeline for the burrito being notable) is still very questionable. As too the merger, I am in favor, but would be solidly against 90% of this article being carried over. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 22:08, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid we aren't communicating. WP:BRD does not mean "I delete whatever I don't like". I don't see where you've done any research or attempted to help with the merge, and when I've addressed each issue you've raised, you've ignored my points and proceeed to delete. I'm not seeing constructive editing behavior here, only an obsessive to need to delete items you personally dislike. That's not how we edit Wikipedia. On your talk page, I've questioned your rationales and justifications for deleting particular items and I have not yet received a reply. You are welcome to reply here. Viriditas (talk) 22:59, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

You are in no position to ingore issues nor are you in a position to be a guardian over content that is in violation of WP policy. Trying to charactize as obsessive is doing nothing but projecting your own issues in to this conversation. If you wish, I will seek further input. But you must stop your edit war on this article in the protection of dubious points with even more dubious sources. If you wish to discuss each point rationally, then please do so, but you are not any authority here anymore than I am, so you must justify issues that are brought up up just as you seem to expect me to (even though you haven't really brought up anything to this conversation at all dispite your repeated claims to the contary). If you really wish to go line by line on this article, then lets do it, but you will not like the results, since you have already shown hostility towards a sensible discussion on the matter. Start by responding to my comments for the line items above. Meantime, I'm flagging this article for notaiblity. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 18:05, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

You have serious behaviorial problems that are outside the scope of this thread. The questions you have asked have already been answered, yet you ignore the answers and continue asking the questions. That's the very definition of tendentious editing and it needs to stop. A merge discussion was initiated which you refused to participate in, calling it "premature". I think you need to stop disrupting the talk page and you need to review Wikipeida policies and guidelines on how to collaborate and discuss a topic. Viriditas (talk) 23:36, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Good, so-so, bad

The an effort to foster an actual dialog, here is a list to illustrate the points and the need for improvement, here are examples of good timeline entries, so-so entries and bad entries:

Good:

Burrito created in 1840s American Southwest/Northwestern Mexico. Spiced meat wrapped in flour tortillas made popular by gold miners who worked with burros. Janey M. Rifkin in Hispanic Times Magazine claims this was the original source of meat.[3]

Comment:This offers the reader context and clearly identifies the historical importance to the topic.— fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 18:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

So-so (may need improvement):

Alejandro Borquez opens Sonora cafe in Los Angeles (later renamed El Cholo Spanish Cafe)[5] According to food historian Andrew F. Smith, burritos were "sold at Los Angeles's famed El Cholo Spanish Cafe during the 1930s."[6]

Comment:Leaves the reader with the question, "Are these the first burritos sold at a resturant?" Also, the date should not be 1923, but rather the date that the first burritos where first offered here. The opening of the resturant itself is not significant. I don't see the opening day of Taco Bell's first outlet on this timeline.— fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 18:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Bad:

SF Weekly publishes John Roemer's influential essay, "Cylindrical God". Roemer estimates 25,000 burritos consumed daily in San Francisco's Mission District.[8]

Comment:There are several violations where. First, the context self-asserts its own importance. Second, the publication date of the essay itself is not a point of importance unless you have another source that says this essay on that day somehow impacted burrito history. In other words, the essay itself would make a good source for information, but it is not a point of interest itself without additional references to make that claim. Third, the point of the 25,000 consumed in SF is out of context. Why is it imporant to burrito history that SF mission district consumers are consuming burritos at any particular number on any particular year? What this the year that burritos became the number one food? The SF influence on the development of burrito history is already established by other points in this timeline.— fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 18:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Ugly:

Jan: In honor of Elvis Presley, Taco Villa offers peanut butter and banana burritos.[31]

Comment:This is a non-sensical entry at best. It is a promotional item where it is not clear just how this has any impact on burrito history at all? Was this the start of other wacky burritos? No. I was making Hersey bar burritos when I was a kid. Was Elvis a big burrito fan? No evidence suggests this. Did this make national or international news as a notable point in burrito history? Nope. Even though it was a local item in a local paper, it lacks context to say why this is important to burrito history itself.— fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 18:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Most, if not all of these content has already been discussed in the above sections. Fcsuper has simply ignored the answers he was given and he has refused to participate in the discussion above as well as the merge discussion. Fcsuper is welcome, at any time, to contribute to a discussion with other editors in the above section, rather than continuing to ask questions and ignore the answers. In addition to the disruptive, tendentious editing by Fcsuper, he is also engaging in the fallacy of plurium interrogationum. It is therefore requested that Fcsuper engage in actual discussion and stick to one topic at a time, working from the question to the answer, argument and counterargument, until an agreement is reached. It is also requested that Fcsuper stop trying to unilaterally delete or make controversial changes to content that is under discussion and to agree to edit in a harmonious manner. Viriditas (talk) 23:42, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

You where told by two people that various entries are inappropriate. You are projecting your actions on to others. Please actually discuss this point instead of complaining about the people you disagree with. You are invited to stop edit warring and discuss it here now. Reference to above commentary is very welcome, as it disagrees with you anyway. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 03:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what it is you do on Wikipedia, but you do not engage in discussion. My responses to your questions in the above have gone completely unanswered. Instead, you keep reposting, copying and pasting, and asking the same questions over and over again in a highly disruptive and tendentious manner. Because of this continued, documented disruption, I am filing an ANI report on you. Viriditas (talk) 04:47, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Violations, line by line:

19th century 1840 Burrito created in 1840s American Southwest/Northwestern Mexico. Spiced meat wrapped in flour tortillas made popular by gold miners who worked with burros. Janey M. Rifkin in Hispanic Times Magazine claims this was the original source of meat.[3]

Needs source. Cited source is a dead link.

1895 The term appears in the Diccionario de Mejicanismos, identified as a regional term from Guanajuato and defined as "Tortilla arrollada, con carne ú otra cosa dentro, que en Yucatán llaman coçito, i en Cuernavaca i en Mejico, taco" (A rolled tortilla with meat or other ingredients inside, called 'coçito' in Yucatan and 'taco' in Cuernavaca and Mexico).[4] [edit] 20th century

None with the entry itself. However, this entry may need third party verification.

1923 Alejandro Borquez opens Sonora cafe in Los Angeles (later renamed El Cholo Spanish Cafe)[5] According to food historian Andrew F. Smith, burritos were "sold at Los Angeles's famed El Cholo Spanish Cafe during the 1930s."[6]

Suggest changing the date to the actual time mentioned in the source "1930s".

1934 Burrito mentioned in U.S. media for first time.[6]

None

Restaurente del Bol Corona opens in Tijuana, Mexico.[7]

Part of the overall unencyclopedia list. If this is a legit item, some connection between this resturant and burrito history needs to be established.

1949 Restaurant Xochimilco opens in Hermosillo, Sonora, Mexico

Part of the overall unencyclopedia list. If this is a legit item, some connection between this resturant and burrito history needs to be established.

1954 Burritos appear on menu at El Tepeyac in East Los Angeles. They are served on plates and offered smothered (with sauce)

Needs source. Candidate for immediate removal.

1955 Burritos appear at Cd. Juarez,Chih. Mex. by Modesto Calleja " Gorgorito " Who sell burritos on a three wheel cycle at the " Estatal #3 Middle School. Later Gorgorito was offering the Burritos on his special Burrera Panel Truck called " Calleja Super Burritos " at the Tecnologico de Cd. Juarez. ITRCJ

Needs context. Details should include explanation for the importance of selling burritos on a "three wheel cycle". Perhaps more detail is availabe on the cited source.

1956 At the age of 19, Duane R. Roberts invents the first commercial frozen burrito for Butcher Boy Food Products

Needs source. Candidate for immediate removal.

1961 Sept. 26: Febronio Ontiveros offers the first retail burrito in San Francisco at El Faro ("The Lighthouse"), and is credited with inventing the "super burrito" style leading to the early development of the San Francisco burrito: the addition of rice, sour cream and guacamole to the basic meat, bean and cheese burrito. Originally a corner grocery store located at 2399 Folsom Street, El Faro got its start when firemen from a nearby station requested sandwiches. Unable to make them, Ontiveros offered burritos instead. Large tortillas were unavailable in the early 1960s, so three six-inch tortillas were used to hold the filling, and sold for one US dollar.[8][9]

None.

Burrito assembly line 1964 Butcher Boy Food Products begins selling frozen bean and beef burritos, first to American Drive-in restaurants with deep-fryers; then later to school districts, food-service companies, and convenience stores

Needs sources. Candidate for immediate removal.

1965 Mi Rancho market sells burritos in the deli in SF

Needs source. Needs details as to the significance of this event. An example of what is necessary is the detail in El Faro entry. Otherwise, this is a candidate for immediate removal.

1969 Raul Duran opens La Cumbre taqueria and offers the first assembly line burrito in SF[10]

None

1973 La Taqueria opens in SF

Needs source. Needs details as to the significance of this event. An example of what is necessary is the detail in El Faro entry. Otherwise, this is a candidate for immediate removal.

1975 Tia Sophia's in Santa Fe, New Mexico credited with inventing the breakfast burrito[11]

This needs re-wording. Right now it is unclear if Tia Sophia's invention is in 1975 or if this is when they were first given credit for being the first.

1980 Butcher Boy Food Products producing over one million frozen burritos a day

Needs source. Candidate for immediate removal.

1982 Gary Espinoza opens Taqueria Pancho Villa in SF, notable for featuring four distinct salsas: red (secret recipe) and green (cilantro, jalapeño and tomatillo blend) on the tables, and hot and mild salsas added to the burrito itself behind the counter (tomato, onion, cilantro, green jalapeño and salt).[8]

This appears to be more notable with salsa history rather than burrito history. Needs context, including a statement that establishes this entry's importance in burrito history.

1987 Santana's Mexican Grill opens; Andrew Marzoni invents San Diego-style "California burrito"

Rather than the opening day of the resturant, this needs to be under the date of "California burrito" invention.

Freebirds World Burrito opens in Santa Barbara, California[12]

This is an ad unless context can be provided to establish the opening of this resturant with burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal.

Assembly in progress1989 Inspired by San Francisco "Mission-style taquerias", Peter Fox and Eric Sklar open Burrito Brothers in Washington D.C.[13][14]

Context needs to be provided that establishes the opening of this resturant with burrito history. This might be notable if this was the first place to offer burritos on the East Coast. I'm guessing that's not the case, however.

1990 Taco Bell, Carl's Jr. add breakfast burrito to morning menu

Context is needed here too. If these are the first breakfast burritos offered in nation-wide chains, then say so here. Candidate for immediate removal, however since this is unsourced.

1991 100 burrito establishments in Mission District

Needs source. Needs context. Candidate for immediate removal.

Skyline Chili adds burritos to menu

Need source. Needs context. Candidate for immediate removal.

Food editor Patti Jean Birosik publishes The Burrito Book

Needs source. Needs context. Candidate for immediate removal.

1992 Taqueria Pancho Villa begins offering "tofu burrito"[8]

At this point, specialty burritos seems to be a bit promotional rather than significant points in burrito history. Besides that, this needs context the covers its importance in burrito history.

1993 SF Weekly publishes John Roemer's influential essay, "Cylindrical God". Roemer estimates 25,000 burritos consumed daily in San Francisco's Mission District.[8]

This is a self-referencial entry. This entry also improperly asserts the value of the source. This article is the source for many points in this timeline, but itself is part of the unencyclopedic list of items here. The 25,000 comment needs context that explains the significants of that snapshot.

Influenced by San Francisco taquerias and burritos, Beth Frumoff founds Chipotle Mexican Grill in Denver, Colorado.[9]

This is an ad. Nothing distinguishes Chipotle from every other place that sells burritos. Candidate for immediate removal.

Taco Del Mar opens in Seattle. Popularizes 1.5 lb "mission-style" burrito"

Needs source. This mention of a specialty burrito seems to be a bit promotional rather than significant points in burrito history. Besides that, this needs context the covers its importance in burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal.

Finished burrito wrapped in foil from La Taqueria 1994 World Wrapps opens

This is an ad. Nothing distinguishes World of Wrapps from every other place that sells burritos. Candidate for immediate removal.

CSPI analyzes fat content of burritos

Needs source. This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal.

Author Hillary Davis publishes the International Burrito cookbook

This is an ad. Candidate for immediate removal.

1995 Anna's Taqueria opens in Brookline, MA.

This is an ad. Nothing distinguishes Anna's from every other place that sells burritos. Candidate for immediate removal.

1997 World's largest burrito stretches 1.09 km, weighing 2041 kg[10]

None.

1998 Washington Post sends Peter Fox to search for origins of burrito[15]

This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history.

1999 Aug: Comic strip cartoonist Scott Adams, CEO of Scott Adams Foods, launches the Dilberito line of frozen, vegetarian burritos[16] [edit] 21st century

This has a self-referenced source. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Needs a third party source.

2001 7,700 feet (2,300 m)-long burrito made in Mexico and listed in the Guinness Book of World Records[17]

None.

2002 University of Texas Press publishes Daniel D. Arreola's Tejano South Texas, a cultural geography of Tejano South Texas. The book delineates the South Texas Mexican food region using a "taco-burrito" and "taco-barbecue" line of demarcation. To the west of this line, Mexican food served in a flour tortilla is often called a burrito, due to the influence of the Mexican state of Chihuahua. To the south and east of this line, the same food may be simply called a taco, showing a "Texas Mexican" influence. To the north, the food gives way to barbecue sandwiches reflecting the influx of European, Southern Anglo, and African Americans.[18]

This entry has an ad embedded with in it. This topic has already been moved to the food section of Tejano. It does not belong here as it is a self-reference. Needs a third party source to state significance of book within burrito history.

2003 Charles Hodgkins begins gathering data from 170 taquerias in San Francisco for Burritoeater.com[19][20]

This potentially an ad and is a self-referential entry that does not establish significance within the context of the history of the burrito.

2005 Burritophile.com launches

This is an ad. This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal.

Freebirds World Burrito (TX) starts online orders

This is an ad. This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal.

May: A Clovis, New Mexico Middle school student creates a 30-inch burrito filled with steak, guacamole, lettuce, salsa and jalapeños for an extra-credit assignment project. The large, foil-wrapped burrito is mistaken as a weapon, and armed police officers are sent in, closing down streets and locking down the school.[21]

This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history.

Jul: Rubio's (CA) Lobster Burrito lawsuit. Rubio's is accused of selling a "lobster burrito" that contains langostino meat from the squat lobster, an edible crustacean but not a lobster, raising questions about labeling lobster meat.[22]

This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal.

2006 Jan: The Burrito Project begins in Los Angeles, California, feeding burritos to the homeless.[23] In November, the project takes off on MySpace and spreads around the world, and in early 2007, the group is awarded a $10,000 MySpace Impact Award for serving "as an instrument of community action on behalf of the needy."[24]

I'm unsure about this one, but it seems to be more important in the history of social causes rather than burrito history.

Mar: Chipotle Mexican Grill starts "Don't Stand in Line " online burrito ordering system[25]

This is an ad. Candidate for immediate removal.

Jun: Ryan Goff gets prison term for Taco Bell burrito extortion"[26][27]

This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal.

Jul 29: Moe's Southwest Grill (FL) starts annual competitive burrito eating contest[28]

Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Needs more information.

Rosemary Gonzales arrested for smuggling drugs inside Taco Bell burrito

Need source. This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal.

Oct. 30: After hearing expert testimony, Massachusetts judge rules that a burrito is not a sandwich[29][30]

None.

2007 Jan: In honor of Elvis Presley, Taco Villa offers peanut butter and banana burritos.[31]

This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal.

Jul: Charles Hodgkins completes his 495th burrito review[20]

This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal.

Sept. 22: Competitive eater Tim "Eater X" Janus eats 10.75 burritos in 12 minutes, beating out Sonya "The Black Widow" Thomas and winning US$3,000 at the Costa Vida World Burrito Eating Championship in South Portland, Maine. Costa Vida's "Big Kahuna" burritos weighed 18 ounces, consisting of rice, beans, cheese and sweet pork in a flour tortilla. Eric "Badlands" Booker previously held the world record (15 burritos in eight minutes) but did not return to defend his title.[32][33]

This is part of unencylcopedic list. Importance of this entry is unclear in the context of burrito history. Candidate for immediate removal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fcsuper (talk • contribs) 04:10, 23 November 2010

Most, if not all of these content has already been discussed in the above sections. Fcsuper has simply ignored the answers he was given and he has refused to participate in the discussion above as well as the merge discussion. Fcsuper is welcome, at any time, to contribute to a discussion with other editors in the above section, rather than continuing to ask questions and ignore the answers. In addition to the disruptive, tendentious editing by Fcsuper, he is also engaging in the fallacy of plurium interrogationum. It is therefore requested that Fcsuper engage in actual discussion and stick to one topic at a time, working from the question to the answer, argument and counterargument, until an agreement is reached. It is also requested that Fcsuper stop trying to unilaterally delete or make controversial changes to content that is under discussion and to agree to edit in a harmonious manner. Unless you are actually willing to respond to my points in the above discussion, continuing to copy, paste, and repeat the same questions over and over again is disruptive. Viriditas (talk) 04:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I think this list warrants a few tags for the article as a whole, so I've added POV, unencyclopedic, and recentism. It would probably be helpful to use inline tags for the specific entries. As I pointed out at NPOVN [3], well-defined inclusion criteria would be very helpful in settling this dispute. Additionally, WP:FOC. --Ronz (talk) 05:21, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Your tagging is acceptable and appropriate and avoids the tag bombing that Fcsuper left during his last round of edits. Considering the merge proposal in the above section, and the effort towards that end, surprisingly, there isn't really a dispute. Fcsuper simply hasn't participated in any discussion of the content he disputes. He has asked questions, received answers, and ignored the answers, preferring to keep asking the same questions. This is classified as tendentious editing. To bring this matter to a conclusion, I've asked Fcsuper to stick to one entry at a time, and above, I've responded to most, if not all of his concerns. Please note, he has not followed up on any of my points, but rather continues to ask a barrage of questions over and over again. Viriditas (talk) 05:28, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

You continue to make pointless digs at the messager, even in the face of others telling you the same things I've been telling you. Please note that I originally tagged this NPOV and recentism prior to the finding of other issues. You even threatened me to not add the recentism tag originally on my talk page! I invite you to discontinue your crusade and to actually discuss the issues with the article. Your responses prior to this have not negated any of WP violations of the article. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 16:37, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Look up the page, Fcsuper. You've been ignoring my comments about the content and focusing on personal attacks alone for almost a week. Would you like diffs to go with those three fingers pointing back at you? I's gots 'dem. Viriditas (talk) 03:33, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Viriditas, for the Elvis matter, your response did not address the violation. You simply puffed up the important of the source, which is your own original research. It didn't change the fact that the entry is very unencyclopedic. The same can be said for your other responses. Simply because you are given the last word in the line of comments doesn't mean you made your point. The proof is in the results. The article is properly tagged for its flaws, which was my goal. So, thank you in bringing others into this discussion to help me with that goal. Additionally, much of your complaint is more about my style than any actual content discussion. I ask questions to give direction as to finding the necessary information and sources needed to make improvements to the article. Now please, FOC and actually discuss the issues with this article in a sensible matter. I'm interested in improving it. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 16:36, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

No, that's not going to work, Fcsuper. You need to directly address the comments I made in regards to your original question. You cannot continue to claim that there is a "violation" and then not respond to comments refuting your original claim, and then continue to making the same claim. You need to stop what you are doing, and respond to all of the points I've made, which so far, you continue to completely and totally ignore. The fallacy of many questions is not an appropriate form of discussion. Respond to the points made, that's how we discuss. We do not make a claim, ignore the response to the claim, and then continue making the claim over and over again. That's tendentious, disruptive editing, and that's exactly what you've been doing on this talk page. Viriditas (talk) 20:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

What's not going to work? Are you still talking about other people's actions instead of the article's content itself? Please focus on the content. Most of items listed in the article have issues that innclude original research, undue weight, unencylopedic items, and unsourced items, etc. The line by line discussion has been started. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 20:33, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I've focused solely on the content, while you've been canvassing your friends and rallying the troops to do war against material YOUDONTLIKE. Please provide a single, solitary diff showing that you've responded to my answers offered to your questions in the context of an actual, threaded discussion. You can't, because your entire tactical strategy consists of ignoring answers and fragmenting the discussion by starting new threads with the same questions already answered in previous threads. You aren't here to improve the article, you're here to disrupt it. During all this time you've spent tendentiously disrupting Wikipedia, I've been working on dozens of articles, including merging content into the burrito articles and discussing plans for improvement. What research have you done on this topic? What have you written? Viriditas (talk) 22:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

"1895 The term appears in the Diccionario de Mejicanismos, identified as a regional term from Guanajuato and defined as "Tortilla arrollada, con carne ú otra cosa dentro, que en Yucatán llaman coçito, i en Cuernavaca i en Mejico, taco" (A rolled tortilla with meat or other ingredients inside, called 'coçito' in Yucatan and 'taco' in Cuernavaca and Mexico).[4] [edit] 20th century

None with the entry itself. However, this entry may need third party verification."

Not sure if you were looking just to have someone else check this out, but if you go to this link http://www.archive.org/stream/diccionariodeme00duargoog#page/n103/mode/1up you'll see on page n102 (98 of the actual book) that it is in the "Diccionario de Mejicanismos" from 1895.Vyselink (talk) 20:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Correctin, n103 Vyselink (talk) 20:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't matter what it says or what you say it says or what reason you give, Fcsuper will ignore all answers and oppose it, and continue to ask questions about it. Viriditas (talk) 03:33, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Vyselink, I'm not challenging the value of the entry itself, just seeking to strengthen it. I'm interested to see if there is some additional material that might make this entry's importance more clear. For example, it would be great to have a source that mentioned its inclusion within this dictionary as the first of such inclusions in any dictionary. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 16:36, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Again, the fallacy of many questions. Let us know when you are actually going to do the research and write the article. All I see is question after question after question after question, in what I can only describe as a distraction from the comments that have already been given to you as answers in past discussion, answer you continue to ignore. Viriditas (talk) 20:05, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

No questions have been asked. Please remember to FOS. Also, if we are to move on from this point, please stop trying to charactorize other's comments negatively. Everyone here is acting in good faith. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 20:33, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

You've been asking and posing nothing but questions, over and over again, and this latest shows that you are "seeking" to modify an entry and you are "interested to see" if there is more material, all of this amounts to the usual, all the while distracting us from moving forward. You are very good at asking questions, but I haven't seen you respond to a single answer or get down to brass tacks and actually do the work required to improve the article. Viriditas (talk) 22:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

World record?

Competitive eater Tim "Eater X" Janus eats 10.75 burritos in 12 minutes, beating out Sonya "The Black Widow" Thomas and winning US$3,000 at the Costa Vida World Burrito Eating Championship in South Portland, Maine. Costa Vida's "Big Kahuna" burritos weighed 18 ounces, consisting of rice, beans, cheese and sweet pork in a flour tortilla. Eric "Badlands" Booker previously held the world record (15 burritos in eight minutes) but did not return to defend his title.[32][33]

How did Eric Booker lose ("previously held") his world record of 15 burritos in 8 minutes to someone who ate 10.75 burritos in 12 minutes? Is this intending to refer to the 'World Burrito Eating Championship' title or something instead of the world record? Nil Einne (talk) 12:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Nil Einne, I concur with my own concern about this entry. It is an example of recentism. In my view, it should be removed from the article. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 20:36, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Please directly and specifically address the question asked by Nil Einne, Fcusper. It would be wonderful to see you do that for once, and it might also require you to do some work, such as research and reading sources. Again, you are misusing the term recentism. The importance of this item depends on the merit and notability of its achievement, namely that of competitive eating. Whether you personally feel it is notable is of no importance to this discussion. Viriditas (talk) 22:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

"How did Eric Booker lose ("previously held") his world record of 15 burritos in 8 minutes to someone who ate 10.75 burritos in 12 minutes? Is this intending to refer to the 'World Burrito Eating Championship' title or something instead of the world record?" Answer: Eric Booker didn't lose his record. The fact that he didn't shows that this entry is an example of recentism as it describes nothing of significance from a historical perspective. I am in favor of the inclusion of world record itself, as long as there is some sort of national/international recognition of this accomplishment. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 23:52, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

In other words, you ignored the question and the topic of the question, just as you have ignored every question and answer on this page, preferring to argue IDONTLIKEIT in every case. The majority of the information on this page is notable in terms of food history, and the focus on the timeline is supported by food historians and multiple writers. Viriditas (talk) 06:02, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

The question was addressed directly, just as I'm directly addressing your comment here, now. — fcsuper ^{(How's That?, That's How!)} _{(Exclusionistic Immediatist )} — 06:05, 30 November 2010 (UTC)