Talk:Cuisine of St. Louis

Wiki Education assignment: Black Foodways in the United States

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 January 2023 and 5 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Chckn nug (article contribs). Peer reviewers: LRonHoover03, Mantaray2.

— Assignment last updated by Mantaray2 (talk) 18:24, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Should "St. Louis style" bagels be added to this article

Feels like they have become notably significant to worthy a mention in the article. 23.84.78.178 (talk) 08:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

This article is now famous

Please see The "St. Louis Cuisine" Wikipedia Page is Hilarious. Erxnmedia (talk) 17:24, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Apparently one of the higher-ups at Gawker is from St. Louis, & the staff thinks it's funny to tease him by writing insulting articles about the place (see also: Deadspin's annual "the Cardinals & their fans suck" rants). Because publicly heaving vitriol at 1.3 million people just because your boss is annoying is hilarious. CaptHayfever (talk) 07:34, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

It does appear that a lot of improvements were made to the page since that article (a lot fewer weasel words, maybe a couple more citations), so we can say it was good that someone at Gawker took this page to task. That said, there are still some issues of neutrality and weasel words that need to be resolved. Gooey butter cake "supposedly" originated in the 1930s? Why supposedly? Do people think that's what happened and everyone just accepts it uncritically? -133.29.108.237 (talk) 04:00, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Article issues

@Ɱ: I've reverted for several reasons which include that some of the restored material is uncited (the onus is on you before restoring), some do not have reliable sources although there are citations, and there was too much in the way of commercial interests. I also gutted some of this because I blocked this promotional editor and cleaned their crap out. None of that is to be restored.

Examples of garbage in article previously that you had restored:

Mayfair salad dressing

Mayfair salad dressing is a salad dressing incorporating anchovy, created at St. Louis's first five-star restaurant, The Mayfair Room, at the Mayfair Hotel, downtown.

References

Who cares? As it is written, it is nothing more than a trivial blurb (brain fart). There is no explanation of its significance nor of its popularity. Worse, like much of the article, it does not tell a first time reader anything about St. Louis cuisine. There's a dressing that has anchovies in it, big deal. Caesar dressing does too. Far too much of the focus here has been on restaurants, giving credits (for what? since good prose is missing on the actual food), and promotional detritus which is what the above really is. That is promo crap. Trying to mention a list of barbecue restaurants is just inviting trouble as it will be subject to creep. This isn't List of restaurants in St. Louis and this article reads terribly to the uninitiated. Focus on the food itself and nothing else.

No one should be linking to restaurant sites. Use books, journals, magazines, newspapers to make a quality article.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:15, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Removal of material

I first removed this and was reverted. Being common in St. Louis isn't enough, hamburgers and hot dogs are popular in St. Louis but you would be doing a disservice in watering the article down with that. More to the point, no one has apparently read it or tried to bring it in line with what is written elsewhere about St. Louis pork steaks. What I reverted said, "In St. Louis, one of the most common pork dishes is the pork steak, a shoulder cut that is slow-cooked until it becomes very tender, then grilled." That seems to be precisely the opposite from the impression given by St. Louis-style barbecue where Raichlen is sourced "These are usually grilled rather than slow-cooked over indirect heat with smoke which is typically associated with the term barbecue in the United States.[1]" Raichlen is sourced and the statement I reverted isn't but is contradictory.

The pork steaks are grilled first and then sauced right? What I reverted doesn't make sense. Cuts of meat that are cooked to tender won't make it to the grill without falling apart and if it is that tender why would you grill it? This is why sources would help and are needed for WP:V. I'm not going to play one edit, mother-may-I. If I get reverted for something so simple where the language is so far out of whack then we need to strip the article to get it back on focus. I do think that there is a place for mentioning pork steaks in this article as it is a dish that is associated with St. Louis.

On my talk page, I have been associated as a deletionist. The deletion happened because I intended to address several issues but was quickly reverted and I'm not addressing them now as piecemeal only to run the gamut of 3RR with small moves, so you get that with less granularity as I make a single larger edit. The rationale used to revert me was incorrect.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 01:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Your edit summary seemed to suggest you were removing content only because it lacked a citation. That's why I reverted. Now that you explain, I agree that it is dubious enough that you could remove it, though a simple way more constructive step could be to add the barbecue info/source disputing it, or putting a dubious-discuss tag, or similar. Also I'm not sure if you've studied food culture and cuisines, but I would argue that it is definitely important to mention most common foods of an area. Hamburgers and especially hot dogs aren't common in much of the world, so a sentence like "As a part of the cuisine of the United States, hot dogs, hamburgers, x, y, and z are commonly served in St. Louis" would be definitely relevant, and not all foods of the US are served in unique cities. I know towns in California where you won't find a bagel or hot dog. But seeing as pork steaks are much more relevant to St. Louis than the hamburger or hot dog, I'd say this is definitely relevant. Again, as for uniqueness to the area, here's another example - sure pizza and hot dogs are served plenty outside New York City, but what is NYC known for? Pizza and hot dogs. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 01:16, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

This article is a candidate for WP:TNT. I'm not sure the subject is notable, quite honestly. One could list restaurants in the area but what sources are defining and describing what "St. Louis cuisine" is? Chris Troutman (talk) 01:19, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree it's a mess, but the items are relevant. And you're entirely wrong on notability. I'm not sure if you write articles on food topics. Factual information on foods, cuisines, and related topics is almost nonexistent on the Internet. I have been to several culinary libraries and can assure you the sources exist, just not as accessibly as we would like. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 01:27, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

If I had a team of dedicated food historians, the food articles on Wikipedia might look like most medical articles, however the interest on thorough development of well-researched food articles is simply almost nonexistent; likewise with useful online content. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 01:29, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Then this is a great opportunity for you. You can get to those libraries and start researching. The consensus can agree the subject isn't notable and delete it. You can write a new article, properly sourced, and you'll get the credit for it. Why you would want to keep questionable content on wiki when we could do so much better is beyond me. Most Wikipedians would be ashamed of the coverage this present article has gotten. Chris Troutman (talk) 01:35, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

I am ashamed, but I am an inclusionist. Some information is better than no information, and as an article creator, even a wreck like this is always better than starting from a blank slate. Also, no, like I said, I have far too many projects to just be able to single-handedly rewrite all food articles here. And I really haven't seen anyone else performing major edits to them, at least not for Western food topics anyway. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 01:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Your philosophy is at odds with how this article is written. It is about the unique cuisine of St. Louis. I quote "A number of foods are specific to, or known to have originated in St. Louis", It is about the culture of St. Louis, right?...that is where possible notability exists. "The cuisine's influences..." indicate that it has uniqueness in its own right. NYC should have pizza and bagels as part of their cuisine...they are noted and famous for those. St. Louis isn't known for bagels and just because they might have a bagel shop or three isn't at all a reason to list them or the fact that bagels are served there. Same for anything that doesn't stand out as St. Louis. We don't want a directory. Otherwise, Rolla, Missouri would have Rolla cuisine where it would list Waffle House, Burger King, Ma & Pa's Greasy Spoon, etc. That's no good.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 01:53, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm not saying the lede sentence is correct, nor how the article is written. And no, an article on a cuisine shouldn't be on the "unique aspects", as that's not what a cuisine is. It's a much broader idea than simply foods that virtually only exist within an area. If St. Louis is known for pork steaks, then by all means, the article on its cuisine should mention that. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 02:12, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

IP reversion

To editor Yamaguchi先生: Can you explain your reversion? The IP provided better sources and removed a lot of questionable material. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:19, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Concerns over the History section of the article

The "History" section of the article is totally focused on the history of St. Louis city. As per the article name, the "History" section of the article should have contained material about the cuisines from this region, it's evolution and influence on other culinary styles.Suman chowdhury 22 (talk) 19:28, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

STL-style BBQ

I don't know if it should be put in this article, but maybe "Saint Louis Style Barbecue" should be mentioned here. Vincent Ree (talk) 15:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Good source for brain sandwiches

This article has a lot of history: https://stljewishlight.org/jewishfood/lost-tables/remembering-when-and-where-you-could-buy-brains-for-25%C2%A2/ And the article really needs to include a photo of Harvey's (if they are not copyrighted) Biolprof (talk) 04:02, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Cleanup!

Wow, this page was all over the place. I rewrote a lot of the content, and addressed several issues people have brought up on the Talk page, over the years.

I provided additional citations so every section has at least one, and linked to more related articles.

The history section was truly about the city and not about its cuisine, so I folded that into the intro paragraph, noting how much of the cuisine and dishes specific to St. Louis were a result of the city’s immigrant population.

I did remove the brain sandwiches paragraph. I don’t dispute that it once existed in St. Louis, but it seems to be so uncommon, and appears to be much more an Indiana state thing than a St. Louis thing. Happy to have it back on the page if there can be some St. Louis-specific citations. Otherwise, I think it doesn’t belong here. Louie Mantia (talk) 07:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

i love how people edit this just for clout and never do any actual research, like why are you editing stuff you aren't interested in researching you just like the power of editing wikipedia lmao — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.12.96.202 (talk) 22:32, 29 March 2024 (UTC)