Talk:Tom Aikens

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  banner as it falls under :Category:Restaurants or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. You can find the related request for tagging here  -- TinucherianBot (talk) 11:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD]] Tagging

message: The below information about the stolen spoon incident in 2004 was removed as "irrelevant". In October 2004, a businesswoman Sarah Roe and her husband Rupert paid  for the meal after entertaining her clients. As the Roes and her clients were leaving the restaurant, Aikens blocked the doorway and accused her of stealing one of his £16 custom-made silver teaspoons. A waiter found the spoon on a nearby table. Aikens still accused Roe, prompting her to boycott Aikens's restaurants. Prior to the incident, nine such spoons had been stolen within at least one month. When the restaurant opened, several £50-ashtrays were stolen until non-smoking policy was applied a while later. 
Shall the "spoon" incident be mentioned in the article again? If so, shall the above passage be used? If not, how else can info about the incident be written? George Ho (talk) 03:16, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: No, as it is irrelevant for the article about the chef. It is worth a (shorter) mention in Tom Aikens (restaurant). The Banner talk 10:15, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Spoon" incident 

message: The post-closure info (i.e. Elystan Street) about Aikens's eponymous restaurant was removed twice as "irrelevant" (version 1, version 2). Shall the post-closure be mentioned again? If neither version, yet you favour reinsertion, how else can the post-closure info be (re)written? George Ho (talk) 03:24, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Both versions have no relevance for both Tom Aikens and Tom Aikens (restaurant). Would you have added it when the restaurant was converted in - for example - a bridal boutique? No? That is my point... The Banner talk 10:14, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Harveys (restaurant) mentions the restaurant being relaunched as Chez Bruce, but it's just one short sentence. (I really wish the Marco Pierre White article has done the same.) How is this different from what we're primarily discussing? Also, maybe I'll use the same format that the Harveys article is using. George Ho (talk) 17:06, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Relaunched under the same ownership vs. a new restaurant with a new owner. The Banner talk 17:23, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  How's (this) version 3: "The site was relaunched in September 2016 under chef Phil Howard as Elystan Street." I already did that at the draft version of the restaurant article. George Ho (talk) 17:26, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

text: what is your brief and neutral statement? At over 2,600 bytes, the statement above (from the  tag to the next timestamp) is far too long for  to handle, and so it is not being shown correctly at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies. The RfC may also not be publicised through WP:FRS until a shorter statement is provided. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 17:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  How's this statement: "The post-closure info (i.e. Elystan Street) about Aikens's eponymous restaurant was removed twice as "irrelevant" (version 1, version 2). Shall the post-closure be mentioned again? If neither version, yet you favour reinsertion, how else can the post-closure info be (re)written?" George Ho (talk) 17:52, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's certainly short enough, but it needs to be directly after the  tag because Legobot won't look for it way down here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:00, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post-closure info