I've been looking at the edit history for this series and I've noticed that Amuro NT 1 has been rather determined to try and berate Alton Brown over the Earl of Sandwich, using increasingly negative means to do so.
Last year, he started off with this on the main page, filing it under Did Not Do The Research:
12th Sep '10 6:39:49 PM AmuroNT1
Added line(s) 48 (click to see context) :
** For years Alton repeated the mythical story that the sandwich was invented by John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich, so he could play cards and eat at the same time; in later episodes, he acknowledges that the sober, workaholic Montagu would have been more likely to eat at his desk than the card table.
It was removed by an Unknown Troper, who then left a markup note in response:
1st Oct '10 2:43:29 PM 69.154.71.0
Doesn't count, sorry.
Added line(s) 50 (click to see context) :
%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown "perpetuating a myth" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. Stop trying to add it in.
Half a year or so after that comment was made, AmuroNT1 edits the markup himself to assert his aims:
4th Apr '11 11:45:57 PM AmuroNT1
Changed line(s) 50 (click to see context) to:
%% To all Negative Nellies trying to rant about Alton Brown "perpetuating a myth" about the Earl of Sandwich, it DOES NOT BELONG HERE. The actual details of the event are still up for debate and it is NOT a case of Dan Browned, Critical Research Failure, or Did Not Do The Research. ''And for that matter, AB cops to the misinformation himself in the Good Eats books.'' Stop trying to add it in.
* Critical Research Failure: Several episodes perpetuate the myth that the sandwich was invented so Jon Montagu, the Earl of Sandwich, could eat and play cards at the same time. In his books, Alton admits that history remembers Montagu as a sober and studious man, meaning he probably didn't gamble and the old story is most likely fake (AB does suggest that maybe the sandwich was made so he could work and eat at the same time, but says we'll never know for sure).
I went and looked this up. Though I wouldn't trust Wikipedia as a primary source, this is what's said on the subject:
"Because Montagu also happened to be the Fourth Earl of Sandwich, others began to order "the same as Sandwich!" However, the exact circumstances of the invention are still the subject of debate. A rumour in a contemporary travel book called Tour to London (although not confirmed) by Pierre Jean Grosley formed the popular myth that bread and meat sustained Lord Sandwich at the gambling table. The sober alternative is provided by Sandwich's biographer, N. A. M. Rodger, who suggests Sandwich's commitments to the navy, to politics and the arts mean the first sandwich was more likely to have been consumed at his desk."
Snippets from the historians themselves are available in the second link.
Critical Research Failure's own main page says that the trope is for remarks "so off-the-scale of inaccuracy that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the subject realizes the writers made the whole thing up." However, the "research" demonstrates that the origin of the sandwich really is up for debate, with several competing theories offered by historians in addition to the popular version.
Therefore, AmuroNT1 is overstepping his bounds. I've removed the markup comment on the main page (since AmuroNT1 obviously saw it and didn't care), as well as his example here on the YMMV page.
I've been looking at the edit history for this series and I've noticed that Amuro NT 1 has been rather determined to try and berate Alton Brown over the Earl of Sandwich, using increasingly negative means to do so.
Last year, he started off with this on the main page, filing it under Did Not Do The Research:
It was removed by an Unknown Troper, who then left a markup note in response:
Half a year or so after that comment was made, AmuroNT1 edits the markup himself to assert his aims:
Then, even though the original markup comment requested people to not file this under Critical Research Failure, Did Not Do The Research, or Dan Browned, AmuroNT1 proceeds add a modified version of his original example on the YMMV tab, this time as a Critical Research Failure:
I went and looked this up. Though I wouldn't trust Wikipedia as a primary source, this is what's said on the subject:
Wikipedia cites these two links:
http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/SandwichHistory.htm
http://www.faktoider.nu/sandwich_eng.html
Snippets from the historians themselves are available in the second link.
Critical Research Failure's own main page says that the trope is for remarks "so off-the-scale of inaccuracy that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the subject realizes the writers made the whole thing up." However, the "research" demonstrates that the origin of the sandwich really is up for debate, with several competing theories offered by historians in addition to the popular version.
Therefore, AmuroNT1 is overstepping his bounds. I've removed the markup comment on the main page (since AmuroNT1 obviously saw it and didn't care), as well as his example here on the YMMV page.
Edited by TrevMUN