Talk:Steak/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Steak. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The only link given to support this claim says nothing of the sort though. It merely reports a single protest that took place last year in Australia. This does not substantiate the claim that the protests are a regular occurrence, not to mention the whole statement is vague anyway, as it doesn't even bother to specify eg. where exactly in the world are vegan activist supposed to be protesting on a regular basis. It's completely unencyclopedic. 93.147.234.105 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:38, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

I would think that after reading the main paragraph a beef steak photo would make the most sense at the top of the page. Nothing against lamb steaks but, besides the photo, lamb isn't even mentioned in the article. Maybe move the beef steak picture up and find a fish steak picture for the bottom part?Brian Earl Haines (talk) 04:48, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I really can only see this turning into a list of types of steak, beyond that I am really not sure what kind of content we can expect here. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 04:07, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

If we can find sources, we could write sections of the history of steaks, cultural significance around the world, production, marketing/selling/promotion, preparation/cooking, steak dishes. We could a separate list article just for types of steaks. - Evad37 [talk] 07:01, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

We should really analyse all this before we reach the week it reaches TAFI. I personally thought this wasn't a very good pick but it was voted in so who am I to complain? Now it seems my fears are being validated...--Coin945 (talk) 07:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I say go with it.. Build it up as a good list article and then submit it as a featured list candidate. David Condrey (talk) 09:31, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@David Condrey, Coin945, NickPenguin, and Evad37: What can I do to help out you guys?Mirror Freak My Guestbook 14:22, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@MirrorFreak: Well, we should look at expanding some of the new empty sections that Evad37 suggested. Googling for some reliable sources that talk about the history of steak, general ways of cooking steak, and so forth. You could also start editing some of the content we have already for phrasing and see if there are any statements you could find sources for. I'm sure everyone else will have other suggestions, there's lots to do. Sometimes it's hard to tell exactly what at the early stage of a collaboration. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 14:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll start listing ways to cook steak. I'll expand the empty sections.Mirror Freak My Guestbook 14:29, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Ironically, there is much at stake but not much at "Steak". Hehe... (Sorry I couldn't resist).--Coin945 (talk) 14:40, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Funny thing is, I just had steak last night...It sucked; was waaaayyyy too tough. I like my steak medium rare.Mirror Freak My Guestbook 15:01, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Back on track: I have a concern with the idea of going with a list-only article. What kind of an encyclopedia doesn't have an article on "Steak" but instead says "See: List of steaks"? The reader is left wondering what a steak is and a list won't answer his question. We need to know what a steak is before we can start listing them. This is equally important for the editor and for the reader. A prose article is the primary encyclopedic form. This is especially important for articles such as "steak", which are concepts that everyone are familiar with, and for that reason people need an outlet of encyclopedic knowledge of. Steak isn't vital or core article on WP, but it could be. For comparison, none of those vital/core articles of comparable scope are lists: spice exists independently of list of spices and nut of list of nuts. In both of those articles, the reader finds what one would expect in an encyclopedia: history, culinary uses, nutritional aspects, commercial activities... encyclopedic coverage. It's worrying to see articles turn into lists just because it's easy to copy entries in summary style from other articles and then put a Main article: template at the top of each section. Writing encyclopedic articles rather than more or less indiscriminate lists is difficult, but on Wikipedia it's what we do. I'm not against lists, I'm against the use of lists where actual articles are warranted. It's up to us if WP has an article on "Steak" or not. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 15:49, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

List articles typically have succinct listings of article topics preceded by a bullet point. This article isn't particularly in list format per how most lists exist on Wikipedia. Rather, some areas provide summaries about various types of steaks, with the "main article" template above them. I'm fine with this, because there are many styles, types and cuts of steaks in the world, so it's natural for there to be several entries. In addition to the new sections added that are unpopulated (History, Production, Marketing and sales, and Cooking), additional information that could be added to the article (some of which in these new sections) includes that about grades of steaks (select, choice and prime in the U.S.), the meatcutting of steaks, steak aging (Hanging (meat), (Beef aging), storage, farm-to-table logistics, packaging, food safety issues, and more. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:32, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

But the million dollar question is: What exactly *is* a steak? It appears that this tossed around term is actually rather arbitrary and can refer to different thing, but in general refers to a certain cut of meat/fish. Maybe there are also other connotative implications of the word, such as the shape of the food and the type of meals it is prepared with. (Beef burger vs. steak burger etc). I duno.. this is a toughy...--Coin945 (talk) 16:41, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

In addition to my suggestions above, more sections that can be expanded in the article include: Fish steak, Pork steak, Meat chop, Fruit and vegetable and Imitation steak. Another option is to omit the Main article templates and headers in the Beefsteak section and rewrite the section into paragraphs, with the main articles linked within the prose. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:44, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I can see that this discussion is becoming fruitful, as we are getting to the heart of the content issue. I'm not sure we would necessarily need full paragraphs perhaps just sourced bulleted list like Pizza#Examples (Italian section, not United States). This would allow us to share the information without necessitating this article match those articles for content. One thing that we need to differentiate is that steak is different than beefsteak, we want to avoid this becoming a duplicate of that. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 17:17, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

@Coin945: There are two ways to answer the question: "What exactly is a steak?". The first one would be a dictionary definition, a concise description that nevertheless grasps all instances of steak along the lines of "[A steak is] a thick, flat piece of meat and especially beef" (Merriam Webster). However, since WP is not a dictionary, our method, the second, of answering the question is more ambitious. We provide encyclopedic descriptions. This is not an easy thing to do but it's what we're here to do. Encyclopedic knowledge of a subject means that we provide overview and context: what are steaks like in terms of physical properties, how are steaks used in cuisine, when did they come about, how are steaks related to the issues raised by @Northamerica1000: storage, farm-to-table logistics, packaging, food safety issues etc. What doesn't either answer the question or constitute encyclopedic knowledge is merely listing things: this is a steak, that is a steak and those are steaks too. A steak is more than the sum of all possible types steaks, so to speak. Yes @Coin945: it's a thoughy and use of the term is not consistent in sources but it's our job to determine the scope and use the sources to compile an overview. It's not the most important thing for us to determine if a "vegetable steak" is or is not a steak and as such within the scope of this article. Ideally, after reading the article on steak the reader would be knowledgeable enough to form his/her opinion about it. Thus, the most important thing is to give the reader enough knowledge about steak so that he or she answer the question: "What exactly is a steak?" Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 17:41, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I think some of the improvements have begun to scratch the surface of what generally makes a steak a steak, at least in reference to a cut of meat. Even with a fair amount of list content, the article is already more well rounded. In the case of fruits and vegetables, I have often heard of thick cut fried eggplant being referred to as "eggplant steak", and there are various recipes available online under that name.

More generally, I do have experience as a butcher (not an expert), and there seems to be some ambiguity between what constitutes a meat chop and a steak; for example, the "pork steaks" currently pictured in the article with the tenderizing hammer would be described as "pork chops" in my country. At the same time, a cut of pork shoulder would be referred to as steaks. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 22:34, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Since there is already quite a good article on beefsteak, this "steak" one ought to be more general and make a useful companion that is not repetitive. So I think here we need to minimise the beefsteak aspect and focus more on a balanced overview of steaks so that the two articles are both useful. To that end, I moved the "See main" template up to the beginning. It also means we should not simply copy from one to the other because we know that Wikipedia readers follow the links and they ought not to be let down by finding exactly the same thing in another place. Each article needs to make its own contribution and give its own coherent account of the topic. This means we need to think whether to put new content here or there, especially the extensive material on beefsteaks. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 00:31, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

For work I've done in the beefsteak section, I have copied content from the individual articles themselves, rather than from the Beefsteak article. Content in that section in this article varies from that in the Beefsteak article. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

There really is an upper limit of the amount of content that can exist in an article of this scope. Perhaps this weeks collaboration should focus on improving some of the related articles, such as fish steak, pork steak and [[beefsteak], as well as this article. Also, improvements we make to the beefsteak portion of this article should probably flow down into the beefsteak article. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 02:36, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree. I had a go at trying to make the lede talk about steaks, the range of steaks and what makes a steak a steak. Given the range of existing main articles about the different types of steak, I think that the sections here referring to the types should be kept concise and reasonably balanced (equal in size) so that readers can get the overview from this article and can easily go on to the others according to whatever their interest is. We need to have a high-level overview here of the concept of "steak". (Who would have thought of steak as concept? Only a lexicographer or a Wikipedian, I guess.) Hence I think that almost all of the section on beefsteak should be cut from here and integrated into the "beefsteak" article. In other words, the beef steak section should be no longer than the pork steak section. One of the good things about TAFI is having the opportunity to sort out these overlaps and confusions. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 09:12, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I could agree to a merge of content in the beefsteak section to the beefsteak article. However, I don't feel that the section should be limited to the size of the pork section or any other section in the article. Beef steak is by far the primary type of steak in the culinary world, so it's important to include all pertinent information. However, a thorough, yet relatively succinct overview (compared to the size and overall content in the beefsteak article) would suffice. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:25, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Agreed with user:Whiteghost.ink that the concept is a useful avenue to explore. Social, cultural and value judgements as well.SovalValtos (talk) 09:48, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree somewhat with Whiteghost, in the sense that the beefsteak content shouldn't be disproportionately longer. Maybe a bit longer, as it is the main type of steak, but we should make a primary effort to expand content for the other types of steaks, as well as the other social related areas. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 15:01, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Information from this article in its Beefsteak section has been merged into beefsteak. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:47, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Good point about the primacy of beefsteak (not all steaks are equal!) but great work merging and making this section more concise. The article is much better for it. More focused. Whiteghost.ink (talk) 22:31, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

The current sentence is not referenced. Sunday or Friday, or both? But surely off topic as is. I have only skimmed through the page and talk so far, but a first impression is that cultural significance could be an important section. Changing perception of steak, and relative values are areas to explore.SovalValtos (talk) 01:18, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Just mammal steaks, not fish? What does "would be" mean. I have no access to the refSovalValtos (talk) 01:54, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I keep coming across examples of vegetable 'steaks'. I haven't found any sources yet that describe it in these terms, but near as I can determine, the general criteria for being a 'steak' is uniform thickness and being of moderate size, at least the size of the palm of the hand. I am also finding products like this which are branding themselves as 'vegetarian steak bites', mostly made out of tofu. There are also various recipes on yummly such as cauliflower, mushroom, cabbage, tofu and eggplant. I'm sure other recipe examples can be found, but I am not sure how to include this content reliably. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 23:18, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

The lead contains the following sentence: For example, there are "swordfish steaks" and "venison steaks", as well as various types of fish steaks, especially salmon. The mention of swordfish steaks in the first half of the sentence followed by as well as various types of fish steaks in the second half sounds very odd to me. I would normally just rewrite this sentence without further input, but I'm puzzled about the best way to rewrite this and still keep the interesting mention about "swordfish steaks". Does anyone have any suggestions? Kind regards, Matt Heard (talk) 04:55, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

It did read a little oddly, so I moved the ", as well as various types of fish steaks" bit to the previous sentence, and removed the self evident "X-type steaks". --NickPenguin_(contribs) 05:28, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

I just made a mess of the etymology section. I need some help rewriting it. Also perhaps changing section title to Vocabulary or something, as with the added detail of the language of ordering a steak it's not purely etymology anymore. Also, note valuable resource: http://www.foodtimeline.org/foodmeats.html David Condrey (talk) 10:02, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

There used to be sections for various types of steak but they seem to be gone now.. So not sure where to put this How Did the New York Strip Steak Get Its Name David Condrey (talk) 10:06, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

• MOTHERLOAD of resources
• not sure..
• Route 66 Historical Steak Joint
• Cut Types
• US Trends in meat consumption
• Mexican Cattle/Beef Industry
• What is the significance of the fact that in English cows and pigs become beef and pork respectively when slaughtered, but fish and chicken stay fish and chicken?

David Condrey (talk) 10:13, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

For a collaboration that seemed to have a bit of a shaky start, this has really developed into a fine example of excellent wordsmithing. I think this could be nominated for GA, but there are some areas I think we could still work on. Off the top of my head, the production section needs expansion, as well as some info on "ham steaks" (which was a good find), and maybe some more expansion on the vegetarian steaks and the human steak section. I am also not sure about the listing of various minced/shredded beef steaks as a bulleted list, maybe this can just be put into straight prose? The marketing and sales section could also do with some additional research for other countries (china, india, etc). --NickPenguin_(contribs) 08:33, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Are "ham steaks from a rolled pork loin" as mentioned and pictured in the section steaks at all? They look like cuts off a cooked joint instead. Surely a steak has to be cooked as the unit that is served. The same logic applies to the standing rib roast mentioned in another section.SovalValtos (talk) 12:06, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

user:Whiteghost.ink The reason for removing the image of the frozen ham steak is that there is no reference to that type of product in the article. I know that one should not use an image as a reference, but the ingredients which are legible show it to be a manufactured confection. The caption says frozen, when the label says Refrigerated at 0°C-4°C. The manufacturer calling it Yu Pin King Ham Steak, does not mean it is a steak for the purpose of this page.SovalValtos (talk) 12:36, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I have seen items called ham steaks for sale, in my experience they are cut from gammon and usually have the bone in. They are sold refrigerated in a cryovac plastic package. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 15:48, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Is http://www.officialsteakandblowjobday.com/steak/history considered a reliable source? SovalValtos (talk) 14:04, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

No. It's essentially a commercial blog that sells merchandise, and there's no evidence of the site adhering to journalistic standards of objectivity. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:40, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I am removing the reference and some of the material supported by it.SovalValtos (talk) 16:42, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Can anyone find anything suitable? There are plenty of mammal, some of fish but none of veg. I have tried and failed.SovalValtos (talk) 16:58, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

I just added File:Bishop, East Dulwich, London (3666527372).jpg (An eggplant steak burger at a restaurant) to the Vegetarian steak steak section. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:02, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

We are getting there with this article. It is much better. The layout is coming along. The galleries should be limited to three or the page gets messed up. I moved watermelon back into the main body so we now have three vegetable images to match the other galleries. It seems that we need a better image of gammon steak, although I like the cold ham steaks on the plate. We need a better image of frozen steak, preferably ham. Or will the Honk Kong one do? It shows quite a different form and illustrates "frozenness", as well as adds another country. We also need a section on Lamb steak (I put in the heading so far) and then the lamb steak image can go there. I moved the reindeer to the cultural significance section and I am not sure that the standing rib is best for marketing and sales, although it is a great image of how steaks can be cut at the point of serving. The carcasses is good image too but I worry that it is too much like beef generally and not enough like steak. Thinking, thinking ... Whiteghost.ink (talk) 00:36, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

I think we should group the last part about steaks made from different meats/vegetables into red/white/other. Turkey steak is currently missing in the white meat section. --Melody Lavender (talk) 11:34, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Rather than sorting everything in the article per "red meat, white meat, and others", which could be lead to subjective interpretation, I'd prefer the addition of a Poultry section if a turkey section is added about turkey steak. If the latter doesn't occur, I thinks the article is all right with the section organization it presently has.

For example, from the White meat article, "certain types of poultry that are sometimes grouped as "white meat" are actually "red" when raw, such as duck and goose". Also from the article, it states, "Given nutritional concerns, meat producers are eager to have their products considered as "white", and the United States National Pork Board has positioned their product as "Pork. The Other White Meat", alongside poultry and fish; however, meats which are red when raw and turn white on cooking, like pork, are categorized by the United States Department of Agriculture as red meats."

Ultimately, this type of categorization in the article can lead to ambiguity. For additional context, see this article from Farm and Dairy. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

The addition "Accounts from medieval times, claim that human meat, when cooked, smells identical to that of any other meat, and takes very good, perhaps better than any other meat.[52]" makes no reference to steak, and whilst useful on another page, does not IMHO fit hereSovalValtos (talk) 01:54, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

I recommend deletion of the entire section as impertinent to the subject matter. But if it is to remain, the contributions I've made to it should remain as well unless it can be replaced with better references because without it the section would be a single sentence; a single sentence would clearly not merit the sections inclusion. This is also why I undid a reversion. Please do not revert edits done in good faith. David Condrey (talk) 06:47, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

I also think the entire section should be removed. --Melody Lavender (talk) 11:20, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

And it could be moved to cannibalism, I could not find the statement about medical use up until the 17th century on that page and it's no doubt interesting and encyclopedic.--Melody Lavender (talk) 11:27, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Please undo the revert you just did to Steak and learn what the appropriate usage of reverting someone is. WP:ROWN If you don't think it belongs, it would be something to mention on the talk page. David Condrey (talk) 01:17, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

David CondreyI should have said that yours was a good faith edit and your work is appreciated. So sorry for that. I reverted because I thought it made the article worse, being off topic. I looked at your suggested link WP:ROWN and saw "a reversion is appropriate when the reverter believes that the edit makes the article clearly worse and there is no element of the edit that is an improvement." I still think that is the case but will revert if others think it should be included.SovalValtos (talk) 01:45, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

if it clearly reduces the quality of the article, revert, because it's vandalism. But what your considering worse is a matter of opinion. In my opinion it makes the article better because without it the section is merely 1 sentence and doesn't justify being. I'm going to undo the revert myself. If you still feel strongly about it, it should be discussed on the talk page of the article. If there is better content to replace it, then by all means; but until then I'm just substantiating the section.

you should never revert another editors contributions unless it's vandalism or undebatable. David Condrey (talk) 06:34, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

SovalValtos (talk) 08:03, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree with David. In many cases it's best to bring it up on the talk page first. --Melody Lavender (talk) 11:31, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

It would be good to include in this section, something of China, Japan, Inuit or southeast AsiaSovalValtos (talk) 17:27, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

I think so, too. The section is slightly Anglo-Centric, currently. It might be more difficult to find sources for non-English speaking countries though. --Melody Lavender (talk) 11:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Like most food, it is traditionally about using what you can produce. Also the Asian approach to using steak has been different (and arguably healthier). My understanding is that Asian countries used not to be keen on large lumps of meat. I have added a comment and ref.Whiteghost.ink (talk) 00:52, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

The article says it is both C class and B class. Which is correct? Whiteghost.ink (talk) 00:54, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Article promoted by User:Biblioworm on 25 November 2014.

GA toolbox
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

This review is transcluded from Talk:Steak/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Biblioworm (talk · contribs) 01:27, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

• Review  In progress. --Biblioworm 01:27, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

@EuroCarGT: Here are my comments:

• Is the article well-written? - There are quite a few minor issues, but they should not be difficult to fix.
  • In a larger sense, there are also fish steaks, ground meat steaks, and so on.
    • "And so on" may not sound too encyclopedic. Perhaps "etc." would be better?

 Done

• • As a "top-quality ingredient" beef steaks "are perfect if properly grilled"[1] but they can be pan-fried, or broiled.
    • Change to "As a "top-quality ingredient", beef steaks "are perfect if properly grilled"[1], but they can be pan-fried, or broiled.

 Done

• • Steak can also be cooked in sauce, such as in steak and kidney pie, or minced and formed into patties such as hamburgers.
    • Add comma between "patties" and "such".

 Done

• • The trade in steaks from bushmeat is a serious threat to biodiversity.
    • This could be clarified a bit. Is this sentence trying to say that bushmeat is becoming more common than steak, vice versa, or something else?

 Done

• • Grilled Portobello mushroom may be called mushroom steak and similarly for other vegetarian dishes.
    • Add comma between "steak" and "and".

 Done

• • The word steak originates from the mid-15th century Scandinavian word steik or stickna' in the Middle English dialect along with the Old Norse word steikja.
    • Comma between "steik" and "or", as well as between "dialect" and "along"

 Done

• • Subsequent parts of the entry, however, refer to "steak fish" which referred to "cod of a size suitable for cutting into steaks" and also "steak-raid" which was a custom among Scottish Highlanders of giving some cattle being driven through a gentleman's land to the owner.
    • Change to "Subsequent parts of the entry, however, refer to "steak fish", which referred to "cod of a size suitable for cutting into steaks", and also "steak-raid", which was a custom among Scottish Highlanders of giving some cattle being driven through a gentleman's land to the owner."

 Done

• • Such countries include especially Argentina, Ireland, New Zealand, South Africa, the United States and the United Kingdom.
    • I don't think "especially" is needed.

 Done

• • In Asian countries, such as China and Korea, steak is traditionally more often sliced and stir-fried and served in smaller amounts as part of a mixed dish.
    • "...traditionally more often..." sounds strange and could probably just be shortened to "traditionally".

 Done

• • Cattle breeds such as Hereford or Aberdeen Angus, date back to the 1700s and a handful of farmers continue to raise cattle sired by registered pedigree bulls.
    • The comma between "Angus" and "date" should be deleted, and a new one should be added between "1700s" and "and".

 Done

• • Beef production is the largest single agriculture in the United States with 687,540 farms raising cattle and over a million in the production process as of the 2007 Agriculture Census.
    • Add comma between "States" and "with", as well as between "process" and "as".

 Done

• • On average, a single farm typically raises about 50 cattle at a time with 97 percent of the cattle farms classified as one of these small family farms.
    • Add comma between "time" and "with".

 Done

• • The outside is seared for flavor while the inside is cooked to suit the diner's preference.
    • Add comma between "flavor" and "while".

 Done

• • Fish steaks are generally cooked for a short time as the flesh cooks quickly, especially when grilled.
    • Add comma between "time" and "as".

 Done

• • The cuts of steak are quite dissimilar between countries owing to the different ways of cutting up the carcass, with the result that a steak found in one country is not the same as in another, although the recipes may be the same, differing "only in their sauces, butters or garnitures".
    • This sentence is too long and could be broken into a couple of separate ones.

 Done

• • Steak has become a popular dish in many places around the world, cooked in domestic as well as professional kitchens and is often a primary ingredient in a menu.
    • Add comma between "kitchens" and "and".

 Done

• • Steak has also been an important breakfast dish especially for people undertaking hard outdoor work, such as farmers.
    • Add comma between "dish" and "especially".

 Done

• • When ordering steak at a restaurant it is common practice to advise the chef or person taking orders of how you would like your steak cooked.
    • Add comma between "restaurant" and "it".

 Done

• • Print references to the word "rare" go back at least to the 17th century (c)1615)
    • The last part of this sentence is messed up with all the stray parenthesis. Perhaps it could just be simplified to "circa 1615".

 Done

• • Steak and other meat products can now be frozen and exported, but before the invention of commercial refrigeration transporting meat over long distances was impossible.
    • Add comma between "refrigeration" and "transporting".

 Done

• • Communities had to rely on what was locally available which in turn determined the forms and tradition of meat consumption.
    • Change to "Communities had to rely on what was locally available, which, in turn, determined the forms and tradition of meat consumption."

 Done

• • Beef steak is graded for quality with higher prices for higher quality.
    • Add comma between "quality" and "with".

 Done

• • The quality and safety of steak as a food product is regulated by law. In Australia, there are National Meat Accreditation standards;[42] in Canada, there is the Canadian Beef Grading Agency;[43] in the United Kingdom, the Food Standards Agency is responsible;[44] and in the United States, beef is graded by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) as select, choice or prime,[45] where "prime" refers to beef of the highest quality, typically that which has significant marbling.
    • I think starting a sentence with a conjunction is generally considered to be bad form, so the "and" just after the "[44]" citation could probably be deleted.

 Done

• • There is a wide range of quickly prepared and well-known beef steak dishes including Minute steak, steak sandwiches, steak and eggs.
    • Add comma between "dishes" and "including". There should also be an "and" before "steak and eggs".

 Done

• • "Surf and turf", which combines meat and fish requires more time to prepare.
    • Add comma between "fish" and "requires".

 Done

• • Steak meat is also often minced, shredded, chopped finely or re-formed to create a range of dishes including steak burger that retain the name "steak".
    • Add comma between "including" and "steak". Also, "burger" could be changed to "burgers".

 Done

• • It is closely similar to the Salisbury steak.
    • "...closely similar..." is repetitive and should just be changed to "similar".

 Done

• • Made popular worldwide by the migrating Germans, it became a mainstream dish in around the start of the nineteenth century.
    • Unneeded "in" between "dish" and "around".

 Done

• • Its development started from the 1970s.
    • Change "from" to "in".

 Done

• • Shoulder steaks are cut from the same primal cut of meat most commonly used for pulled pork, and can be quite tough without long cooking times due to the high amount of collagen in the meat, therefore, pork shoulder steaks are often cooked slower than a typical beef steak, and may be stewed or simmered in barbecue sauce during cooking.
    • Change the comma between "meat" and "therefore" to a semicolon.

 Done

• Is the article verifiable? - Yes
• Is the article broad? - Yes.
• Is the article neutral? - Yes.
• Is the article stable? - Yes.
• Is the article illustrated? - Yes.

Result: I'll put this  On hold for now. If you make the minor fixes to the sentences that I mentioned above, the article should pass rather easily. I would also recommend grouping sections 7-11 under a larger heading called "Types". (I'm probably not that great of a reviewer, because I'm tempted to go and fix the issues myself rather than type them out and wait for someone else to fix them. ) --Biblioworm 19:37, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, will do in a bit. ///EuroCarGT 21:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

@Biblioworm: These outstanding issues have been resolved. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 23:27, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Very well. I will get back to you in a few minutes with the results. --Biblioworm 23:28, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

@EuroCarGT and NickPenguin: Thank you for your improvements; the article looks much better. ✓ Pass --Biblioworm 23:46, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:27, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

I was told that the term 'steak' is derived from 'Hamburger Stück', 'Stück' being the German word for 'piece' and 'Hamburger Stück' being a certain piece of beef that was once served in the city of Hamburg, Germany. It seems clear that 'Hamburger Stück' is the origin of the term Hamburger, but I could not find any source that 'Stück' is also the origin of the term 'steak'. Can anyone help me to find an answer? 80.71.142.166 (talk) 06:52, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ham steak. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 19#Ham steak until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2020 (UTC)