HOME > Chowhound > Site Talk >
What's your latest food project? Tell us about it
TELL US

Place records lost in the redesign

squid kun Oct 22, 2009 10:00 PM

The NYC places include a number of venues inside Chelsea Market, a former biscuit factory that now comprises a ground floor full of unrelated eateries (and office space upstairs that I think includes the Food Network offices).

There were enough food places in there that at some point I entered a separate record for Chelsea Market (http://www.chow.com/places/8137) and linked to it from most of the market's Chow records in what is now the Good to Know field. Here are some of them:

http://www.chow.com/restaurants/23564/friedmans-lunch
http://www.chow.com/restaurants/17074/ronnybrook-milk-bar
http://www.chow.com/restaurants/13861/the-lobster-place
http://www.chow.com/restaurants/38517/ruthys
http://www.chow.com/restaurants/17528/fat-witch
http://www.chow.com/restaurants/14843/202
http://www.chow.com/restaurants/8252/the-green-table
http://www.chow.com/restaurants/3836/buon-italia
http://www.chow.com/restaurants/13667/amys-bread

Since the redesign, mysteriously, the Chelsea Market URL (#8137) redirects to the page for Chelsea Wine Vault (http://www.chow.com/restaurants/48748/chelsea-wine-vault), a wine store inside the market. So the venue records above now contain bad links, and the wine store's record now contains a link to itself.

Something similar appears to have happened to a pre-redesign record for the Essex Street Market (http://www.chow.com/places/8138), another umbrella venue that houses a number of food vendors. That URL too now redirects to the wrong place, a record for Essex Farm (http://www.chow.com/restaurants/49855...), a vendor inside the market. And all records that linked to the Essex St. Market page now link incorrectly to Essex Farm.

Please restore the Chelsea Market and Essex Street Market pages. If that can't be done, please let us know why, and repair or remove the bad links.

I sent a note about this on 10/4 to the redesign e-mail address but never heard back, so it must've fallen between the cracks. That's why I'm posting here.

  1. squid kun Oct 22, 2009 10:26 PM

    This may be a related problem: Before the redesign there was a place record for Tabla, an upscale Indian restaurant in Manhattan. When Tabla spun off a street cart (http://www.chow.com/restaurants/51896/tabla-street-cart), I cross-linked from the cart's record to the original restaurant's record, which used to be at http://www.chow.com/places/7533 .

    Now the original Tabla URL redirects to the cart's record. And there's a duplicate Tabla record at http://www.chow.com/restaurants/13721..., though I guess if the original record has been erased it's not really a duplicate. I wish you'd restore the original, though, because I think it had a web site link and possibly hours and other info. The new one is much less helpful, containing only the address and phone, not even a primary cuisine.

    1. squid kun Nov 2, 2009 07:36 PM

      Here's another: Momofuku Bakery & Milk Bar, a branch of David Chang's downtown Manhattan empire. A preredesign record did exist, at http://www.chow.com/places/40398 (it was linked at one time from this Digest item: http://www.chow.com/manhattan_digest/7566 ).

      Since the redesign, that's become a bad link. That URL now redirects to Momofuku Ssam Bar, an affiliated but separate eatery that shares the same street address but serves very different food. The bakery now has a duplicate record at http://www.chow.com/restaurants/912705/momofuku-milk-bar - though as with the Tabla case mentioned earlier, if the redesign wiped out the user-entered original, the dupe is no longer technically a dupe. Anyway, please at least fix the bad link from the Digest, which makes Chow.com look sorta clueless.

      Speaking of clueless, the map on that Ssam Bar record places this Manhattan restaurant in Brooklyn, just off the Gowanus Canal (see screen grab below). For further examples or comments, this bug is discussed on another thread: http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/663451

       
      1 Reply
      1. re: squid kun
        squid kun Nov 4, 2009 12:25 PM

        BTW the Ssam Bar record now includes a photo from the now-missing Milk Bar record.

      2. squid kun Nov 4, 2009 09:41 AM

        Here's another preredesign record that somehow vanished in the redesign, replaced by a less helpful new record. The original URL - www.chow.com/restaurants/17533/dinosaur-barbque - can still be glimpsed in a Google search. But now that address redirects to http://www.chow.com/restaurants/14151....

        The original included links to Chow records for Dinosaur's two upstate locations. They've been erased in the new record. The original rendered the name as Dinosaur Bar-B-Que, which appears to be how the restaurant spells it. The new record changes it to Dinosaur Barbecue.

        This is another example - one of many I've seen - of the redesign overriding correct info contributed by Chow users and replacing it with incorrect info, apparently from Chow's outside data provider. It sends a message to any users who would add or update Chow restaurant records: Don't bother.

        1 Reply
        1. re: squid kun
          rworange Nov 11, 2009 01:00 PM

          >>>. It sends a message to any users who would add or update Chow restaurant records: Don't bother.

          yes

          Two of the four restaurants at the Cliff House are gone and when I try to add back the missing record I can't.

        2. Robert Lauriston Nov 9, 2009 05:19 PM

          It looks to me like a lot of records were inappropriately merged, that is, a restaurant was treated as a duplicate of a different restaurant. E.g. Chez Panisse Restaurant has been merged with Chez Panisse Cafe:

          http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/656837

          1 Reply
          1. re: Robert Lauriston
            squid kun Nov 17, 2009 12:18 AM

            What you call "inappropriate," I call "erroneous." Or, better, "flat wrong." Guess I would've flunked Euphemisms 101.

            Here's another:

            Mei Lai Wah, an old-school cafe in New York Chinatown, had a Chow record before the redesign at www.chow.com/places/3602 (post-redesign: www.chow.com/restaurants/3602/mei-lai-wah). Mei Lai Wah closed in April 2008.

            Some months later, a new cafe under new ownership opened in the same space with a face-lift and a slightly tweaked name: Mei Li Wah. It had its own record at http://www.chow.com/places/35370, with its updated name and phone number and a scan of its menu. That page is linked from at least one Chow blog entry: http://www.chow.com/manhattan_digest/....

            Since the redesign, that link is now incorrect. The Mei Li Wah record appears to have been erased, and its URL redirects to the record for the now-defunct Mei Lai Wah. That record still bears the out-of-date phone number, but it picks up the menu scan from the now-disappeared record for Mei Li Wah.

            To the site crew: Please restore the Mei Li Wah record, with its up-to-date info, and make sure Chow's blog links connect to the correct page. I've updated the Mei Lai Wah record as closed to reflect that shop's current status.

          2. squid kun Nov 15, 2009 12:22 PM

            Chatham Restaurant, a dinerish cafe/dim sum spot in Manhattan Chinatown, had a Chow record before the redesign at http://www.chow.com/restaurants/3601. Elsewhere on the site you can still find at least one blog item that links to it: http://www.chow.com/manhattan_digest/5651

            Since the redesign that's become a bad link. Chatham Restaurant's URL now redirects to the record for Chatham Square Restaurant ... http://www.chow.com/restaurants/7050/chatham-square-restaurant - just a couple doors away but a world apart, an upscale Cantonese banquet hall.

            Meanwhile the redesign has introduced a dupe record for the downscale Chatham at http://www.chow.com/restaurants/12727..., though it uses the Chinese name no longer used in its English signage (Hop Shing) and omits cuisine and hour info that users had entered on the pre-redesign record.

            Please restore the user-supplied Chatham Restaurant info at its original URL, or transfer it to the new Hop Shing record.

            1. Melanie Wong Nov 24, 2009 12:54 AM

              The original record for Koi Garden in Dublin has disappeared. It seems to have been merged with its sibling Just Koi, as threads now redirect to this place record.
              http://www.chow.com/restaurants/8576/...

              A new Koi Garden record was created by the database provider, but it doesn't have any of the linked discussions. Please restore the original Koi Garden record.

              1. squid kun Jan 17, 2010 10:51 PM

                Here's another: Masa, a high-end Manhattan sushi place, had a pre-redesign Chow record at http://www.chow.com/places/13237. Now that URL redirects to the record for Bar Masa, a cheaper sister restaurant next door (http://www.chow.com/restaurants/52001...).

                To the Chow team: Please restore the user-entered record and accompanying information for Masa. Masa should be represented on any site that claims to be a reliable reference source for New York restaurants. And before Chow redesigned the restaurant section, it was.

                3 Replies
                1. re: squid kun
                  Melanie Wong Jan 17, 2010 11:51 PM

                  This happened to Oliveto and Oliveto Cafe in Oakland. A new record seems to have been created for Oliveto, but it has none of the info and linked reports that the original version did.

                  1. re: Melanie Wong
                    rworange Jan 18, 2010 08:43 AM

                    Just found out it happened to Picco and Picco Pizzaria. These have different websites, so one website was lost.

                    What even makes this worse is that the record in the restaurant database is for Pizzaria Pico which does NOT take reservations. It has the opentable link ... which goes to Picco restaurant that does ... total confusion
                    http://www.chow.com/restaurants/7591/...

                    1. re: rworange
                      squid kun Jan 18, 2010 08:06 PM

                      That's an especially bad one.

                      And I'm not even going to look at what happened to NYC hotel records (same address, different venues) since hearing about the screw-up you've encountered.

                2. squid kun Apr 15, 2010 08:57 PM

                  Another one ... Before the redesign, Clinton Street Baking Co. in downtown Manhattan had a place record at http://www.chow.com/restaurants/6582 - it was linked last year in a Digest item at http://www.chow.com/blog/2009/03/the-brunch-lovers-bible

                  Since the redesign, that URL redirects to a record for the unrelated Clinton Restaurant at http://www.chow.com/restaurants/44558/clinton-restaurant . Then the site created a duplicate record for Clinton Street Baking Co. at http://www.chow.com/restaurants/91984... - but stripped out all the user-contributed info from the original record: cuisine, hours, Web site link, photo, etc.

                  Please restore the original user-provided detail on Clinton Street Baking and correct the Digest link.

                  1 Reply
                  1. re: squid kun
                    squid kun May 22, 2010 10:15 PM

                    To the site team: Any progress on restoring the user-contributed restaurant information that was erased by subsequent Chow releases?

                    When I'm meeting friends at a restaurant, I'll often e-mail a link to a Chow record. As it happens I'm meeting someone soon at this restaurant, Clinton St. Baking Co. But I won't bother e-mailing the current, post-redesign record at http://www.chow.com/restaurants/91984 - it's been stripped of the Web link, cuisine, hours and other helpful info that the now-inaccessible user-entered version contained.

                    Site users volunteered uncounted hours of their time, at the site's request, to enter this kind of venue information. When Chow's tech folks wiped it out, they damaged the site and rendered it less informative. I'd think someone at the site would consider that a bad thing, but so far we've heard nothing on this subject.

                    This has been a known issue for many months. Any update on plans for fixing it would be welcome. And if you've simply lost the user-contributed info, we'd appreciate it if you'd just say so.

                  2. squid kun Apr 20, 2010 06:54 PM

                    Here's another: Before the redesign, Rare Bar & Grill's Lexington Ave. location had a place record at http://www.chow.com/places/3190. It was linked from the record for the Bleecker St. location, now closed: http://www.chow.com/restaurants/3191/rare-bar-and-grill .

                    Since the redesign, the URL for the Lexington location redirects to a record for Rare View - http://www.chow.com/restaurants/35060... - a rooftop bar in the same building, the Shelburne Hotel.

                    Please restore the original user-contributed record for Rare Bar & Grill on Lexington.

                    4 Replies
                    1. re: squid kun
                      Melanie Wong Apr 20, 2010 07:23 PM

                      Have any of the records you've reported been restored? It's a shame to lose the linking history and other info that the original records had.

                      1. re: Melanie Wong
                        squid kun Apr 20, 2010 07:43 PM

                        No, unfortunately. But I keep hoping the site team will do the right thing at some point and address these issues. After all, users volunteered their time to enter these records at the request of the site.

                        If anyone in a position to know can tell us when these fixes will be made, we're all ears!

                        1. re: Melanie Wong
                          rworange Apr 20, 2010 09:55 PM

                          I am a bit confused. I thought all the liniking history was gone with the redesign. Am I missing something?

                          All that seems to come up now are a few recent links and then when you click on "see all reviews"... it just does a search based on the name which can turn up anything. Am I wrong here?

                          That is why when I was updating records I started adding significant links in the reviews around the web section ... so anyone interested didn't have to hunt and peck ... like for the record for NOPA ... scroll to the bottom
                          http://www.chow.com/restaurants/2160/...

                          Of course, the fly in that ointment is that I no longer follow the SF board except for posts I've previously contributed to.

                          1. re: rworange
                            Melanie Wong Apr 21, 2010 12:32 AM

                            Here's an example with five discussions dating back to 2008 that were explicitly linked and show on the front page.
                            http://www.chow.com/restaurants/980/t...

                            Problem is that if more than that number are linked up, the older ones fall off the page.

                      2. squid kun Jun 4, 2010 07:21 AM

                        Here's another: Before the redesign there was a record for University Pita at http://www.chow.com/37576 .

                        Since the redesign that URL - linked from the record for the restaurant's now-closed predecessor at http://www.chow.com/restaurants/13599... - unhelpfully redirects to the defunct venue's record.

                        To the site crew: Please restore the record for University Pita, and bring us up to date on progress toward repairing the damage done by the redesign.

                        1. squid kun Jun 6, 2010 11:54 AM

                          Any update on restoring the user-created Chelsea Market record? Just had occasion to update some info on a couple of venues in there. Those bad links look pretty dumb.

                          Show Hidden Posts