Talk:Angus Steakhouse

Deletion?

I recommend this page be deleted. It's sounds like someone visited an Aberdeen Angus Steak House and was upset with their visit or was possibly fired from the company. In any case, I find it hard to believe that no one likes these steak houses. Unfortuanately, I don't have access to the internet from work. If anyone can balance this article a little bit I would appreciate it. Eris11 16:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC) Don't delete it, just rewrite it. I did several times with good comments but everytime I did someone came back and rewrote it like a crtic would. I created this article and I didn't want it to look like this. Will you rewrite it? Unisouth 09:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC) Ok, deal. It looks like someone's already touched this one up but I'll keep an eye on it too in case that user comes back to deface it again. If they do, we'll block their IP address which should sober them up a bit. Eris11 14:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

2008 NPOV

This article has had some long running issues, however apart from coverage of its entrance into receivership in 2002 and articles (in reputable sources like the Telegraph) about how no Briton would eat there, there isn't much else. Question I guess is whether this is at all notable outside a food review magazine when it hasn't had anyt recent coverage. Thoughts? Travellingcari (talk) 21:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Notable restaurant chain. Everyone in Britain has heard of it. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but that unfortunately doesn't make it pass WP:N, I'm not suggesting it be deleted or anything, but there doesn't appear to be anything else to add. Travellingcari (talk) 16:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering why the text I had added citing the unusually critical write-ups and reviews of this chain had been deleted. If (as in this case) all critical comment is negative, then it is not POV to cite this comment. Indeed, there is a reasonable argument that the thing that makes the chain really notable is its astonishingly poor reputation, which has made it a frequent butt of jokes in UK press and elsewhere. The article is now bordering on the misleading - the Telegraph article is cited as if it was a neutral write-up, rather than one of the worst reviews you could ever hope to see in print. LeContexte (talk) 11:31, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Add it back in if you want. I tried to find something to say that wasn't horrendous but there doesn't appear to be much positive coverage of this restaurant. I don't know that it's all that notable in the first place, I just attempted a clean up. TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 17:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

It's notable in the sense that it has an unusual reputation for badness - as testified by numerous newspaper articles over the years. The threshold for notability for a business is really quite low (WP:CORP). LeContexte (talk) 20:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Date of origin

The article claims that it originated in the '60s based on the chain's mention in an article about sports events in 1966. Yet the company logo on their website states that the company was founded in 1976. I'd think that if the company was really around in the '60s, they'd have advertised a 1960s-or-earlier founding date rather than 1976. Rjhatl (talk) 22:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Aberdeen Steak Houses is mentioned in Fodor's 1962 guide to Britain and Ireland. My surmise is that Aberdeen and Angus were separate companies that merged in 1976. But that's just a guess. jnestorius^(talk) 15:57, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

2009 - still not neutral

This article is not neutral because the bad stuff has been edited out, but its bad reputation is the only notable thing about it. This chain is a standing joke in the UK. It is (more like was now) the most notorious tourist rip off in London. Its whole business model was based on ripping off unsuspecting tourists who they knew would be one time only customers by selling astonishingly overpriced crap in swish looking restaurants in prime tourist locations. Not illegal, but not exactly honest. Umpteen articles about this have appeared in the national media. The article is actually way too positive to be neutral. Anyway, their reputation caught up with them in the end. Choalbaton (talk) 20:47, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Foundation

Peter_Evans_(restaurateur)#Restaurateur suggests that the first one was a joint venture between Evans, Reg Eastwood and accountant Tom Beale, and it was at 1 Kingly St, the site of Evans' club The Cat's Whisker which was closed down in 1958. It sounds plausible, but I don't have access to the relevant reference (Mood and Atmosphere in Restaurants by Malcolm Newell). I've also added a pic of 1 Kingly St to the Evans article which may be useful. Le Deluge (talk) 02:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Angus Steakhouse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101030232816/http://www.thisislondon.co.uk:80/news/article-4554104-noble-cause-saves-steakhouse-chain.do to http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-4554104-noble-cause-saves-steakhouse-chain.do
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090120081402/http://angussteakhouse.co.uk:80/contact.html to http://www.angussteakhouse.co.uk/contact.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:55, 14 October 2016 (UTC)