Talk:The Salt Lick

[Untitled]

I don't know why this should be deleted. The information in this article is correct, as I know from both the company's website and my experience working at this restaurant. It is a well written article and I'd be insulted if it were deleted because I can't cite my experience as a source. I cited all I could, really.

No, you copied all you could. Citing means that you write about something in your own words, and provide links to reliable sources that back up what you say. Citing does not mean stealing other people's words. I'm sorry that you will be insulted by its deletion, but Wikipedia doesn't allow copyright violations. Mayalld (talk) 06:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I did not copy any of this. Look it all up word for freaking word. I typed it all in the last couple hours. I work at this restaurant. And I'm a good writer. I'm sorry if this looks like copied material, but it's not. It's from my brain and from my experiences. How do you suggest I cite that? I did cite the company's website, and most of my information backs up to there. I know there's stuff you can't find on that website, but for god's sakes it's true. Clearly, you've never been there. I've also lived in the area all my life. I've been around since it was hardly open at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawn eternity (talk • contribs) 06:40, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

It's clearly blatant advertisement. Λuα ^{(Operibus anteire)} 06:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's a cool place. If you think it's a bit much, suggest to me what to take out! And I'm backing up my info as we speak.

Other problems with this article are conflict of interest and it's not notable. Λuα ^{(Operibus anteire)} 06:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Copyvio or Advert

I've removed the sd for being a copyvio. However, this is just an advert, and tagged for deletion as such. Mayalld (talk) 06:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Conflict of interest? Explain what you mean by that. Hey, I'm just trying to write something to educate people. And if you've checked out the footnotes I've added in the last five minutes, you can at least begin to tell I'm not pulling this out from my butt. This is my first article, but I didn't copy it. Can't you, you know, maybe help me with whatever's wrong, rather than aiming to destroy me? I don't know what I did to insult you so much. Sheesh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawn eternity (talk • contribs) 06:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I do thank you for removing the copyright stuff though. Sorry it sounds like an advertisement. I was trying to be factual. Which, you know, it is. But tell me what you think's particularly horrible. And I'll change it, or take it out. Don't think I'm all for advertisements, myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawn eternity (talk • contribs) 06:56, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

A conflict of interest:

COI editing involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote your own interests or those of other individuals, companies, or groups. Where an editor must forgo advancing the aims of Wikipedia in order to advance outside interests, that editor stands in a conflict of interest.

Which is the case here.

Also, I doubt the restaurant is notable enough for inclusion.

Finally, it sounds like an ad all from the very first sentence (world-famous...).

I am very sorry if we seem like we are biting you, it's not our intention.

Λuα ^{(Operibus anteire)} 07:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

It is world famous! When there was a fire in the banquet hall several years back, it made a spot in the USA today. Just take five seconds to look it up. It's worth mentioning in Wikipedia. I added quite a few reviews from people that back up whatever opinions are listed in this article, and if that's not enough, well, I don't know what is. Next time you're in Austin, check it out and you might just agree. Anyway, I'm glad you're out to take this article down for it's "advertising tone," but hate to break it to you, your time is better spent taking down poorly written articles that no one really cares about. I guarantee someone will find this useful, as for the articles on Lehman High School, a school in our area, I can't say that for... or for, say, Konrad Szymański... Like I said. Great use of your time. And great waste of mine, apparently. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawn eternity (talk • contribs) 07:16, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah! And thanks for removing my citations. Classy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawn eternity (talk • contribs) 07:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Having been mentioned in USA Today does not make anything world famous, does it? --Gunnar Hendrich (talk) 07:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Isn't this the American English edition of Wikipedia? And anyway, like I said. It's probably a whole lot more useful than quite a few articles on here, anyway. Sorry if it's not neutral enough for you. I'm going to bed. Have fun patrolling Wikipedia for useful, well-written articles to take down! :] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dawn eternity (talk • contribs) 07:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

There is no "American English edition" of Wikipedia.

And XLinkBot removed your links because they were spam.

Please try to assume good faith next time and do not personally attack any editor.

Cheers mate!

Λuα ^{(Operibus anteire)} 07:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Please, Dawn Eternity, stop taking it so personally. Yes, you worked on the article, but Wikipedia requires notability, and it requires neutrality. If the article doesn't meet those requirements, it has to go, no matter how much you worked on it. The main problem here is that the article sets out to tell everybody about this wonderful restaurant, and never for a minute stops to write an unbiased, factual account of the place. You describe the restaurant as "World Famous", but it isn't. I've just been round the office, and not one of 20 people I asked has ever heard of this place. OK, so I'm in the UK, but that's the point. It isn't World famous. Calling it World Famous when it is actually locally well known, and once made the US national media is just hype, and has no place in an encyclopedia article. Mayalld (talk) 07:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Koozies, and other issues

I've made some edits to the article to remove a number of unsourced claims ("world-famous" being one), original research and apparent advertising (the price lists and concessional offers for example).

What's left still raises two issues for me:

• What is a "koozie"?; and
• What is the claim to notability for this restaurant? The New York Times article is certainly coverage in a reliable secondary source, but its the only such source I could find. The claim to notability might be as the near-last of a dying breed of restaurant, but the article itself doesn't claim this and provides no information on how many other such open-pit bbq restaurants there are or why this style is significant. Other online references are paid advertising, blogs or trivial mentions in travel pages.

Can anyone help with either of the above? And of course, if there is disagreement with the material I removed please feel free to discuss here and we'll see if a consensus can be reached on its inclusion or otherwise. Euryalus (talk) 11:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

A koozie is most likely this sort of garment for a bottle listed under Beer koozie. Gunnar Hendrich (talk) 11:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I still can't figure out what makes this restaurant in particular different from any other. OK, it's a great, "wonderful place" but that does not mean it deserves inclusion in Wikipedia!

Λuα ^{(Operibus anteire)} 14:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)