This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
I didn't see a citation for the following statement: "though today, more than 60% of its beer is produced at the company's Cincinnati brewery". Looked into it and found that Boston Brewery claimed only 35% in 2007. http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/03/31/story14.html I'm new to the editing wikipedia thing, but was doing some research on Sam Adams and would like to hear if anyone has any references for the 60% figure. Jjbauer ( talk) 19:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Who calls this a craft beer.... its owned by Budwiser there is nothing craft beer about corporate brewing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.168.215.26 ( talk) 00:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I believe another beer they make is "Fezziwig Ale" (delicious!) included in the yearly Christmas 12-pack. - Perl guy 03:55, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
What would be the best way of adding that it tastes really strong (the classic Boston Lager) but really good without violating "NPOV"? 207.69.140.23 13:11, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Just editing the link so it points in the right direction. Whispering 22:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)disambiguation link repair ( You can help!)
The article claims that certain Adams beers are 26% alcohol. From what I've read, this is an amount of alcohol impossible without distillation. Can someone cite a source for this? If not, I intend to delete all info pertaining to alcohol content in that section.-- Hraefen 05:42, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
It's really hard, but both Sam Adams and Dogfish Head have brewing beers with incredibly high alcohol contents. The question I'm interested in is the difference between Beer and Barleywine, as the page currently has a barley named as the strongest beer. Isn't barleywine its own beverage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.74.242.203 ( talk) 01:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
The opening line to this article refers to Sam Adams as a "patriot/traitor (depending on perspective)" I am going to remove the "traitor" reference, it's extremely weird at best. After more than 200 years of American sovereignity it seems odd to take the British colonial perspective when writing about revolutionary war figures. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and other founding fathers are not listed as "traitors" in the opening lines of their respective articles. Samuel Adams was a single participant in a popular uprising against British control-- is every soldier who fought in the war for independence also a "traitor"? If someone wants to include a "Torry" take on Sam Adams somewhere else in the article thats fine by me, but it's messed up to call him a traitor in that first line. LearningKnight 15:58, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Where's the brewery infobox? - Acjelen 03:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
The first link in the external link section requires the reader to be at least 21 years old to veiw the website. I don't know if its good Wikipedia policy to include links that are descriminate based on the age of the reader. I plan on deleting the link unless someone can convince me not to.
I removed the following text that was the "trivia" section:
I doubt that this is true, and is probably vandalism. Please do not restore it unless some citation is found. -- rogerd 19:46, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I'll need to dig up a reference, but I remember reading that Samuel Adams was never a brewer, though he was a a grain malster for a time. Vpoko 23:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't mean to be a jerk, but Samuel Adams really is an independant brewery? I mean when you look at all the St. Patty's day t.v. advertising you notice that the so-called chefs make a three second statement and have only their illegible signature as their only i.d. I mean when Lowenbrau ran their ads as an "imported beer" they were owned by the Miller brewing company. Lowenbrau was brewed and bottled in the United States. The whole thing was a fake. I would not be suprised if Sam Adams is nothing but a Hollywood created gimmick paid for by Miller or Budwieser.
Not going to repeat what it said except that it sounds kinda like something Homer Simpson would say.
I have to take issue with the edit made by 76.202.60.53 on June 27, 2007. What he/she claimed to be "unsupported advertising hyperbole" is in fact just the reality of contract brewing. I don't see any reason to doubt the company's claim, and feel that the sentence as it currently reads uses a weasel word ("claims") to cast doubt on the fact that the Boston Beer Company produces all of their own beer, despite using equipment at other facilities. Thoughts? deciding39 02:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I've altered the text someewhat to remove the weasel word ('claims'). The text now reads 'According to the Company...'. Documentreview ( talk) 03:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I noticed this bio Jim Koch, the Sam Adams founder, has been deleted a couple of times as non notable. I would say otherwise given their success. Is anyone game? Chris 03:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone remember the marketing debacle where Jim Koch claimed to be the great great grandson of Samuel Adams? Budweiser(?) attacked him directly in their ads exposing his fraudulent claim. Koch made the mistake of making embarrassing, angry rebuttal ads. This would have been somewhere around 2001-2003
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find references to this online, but I will never forget the ad war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.154.245 ( talk) 04:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
The article currently states that the Cranberry Lambic is not a true lambic. The lambic article says that lambics are only brewed in a specific region, similar to Champagne. Is this the reason for the caveat on the Cranberry Lambic? Seems like we should say so if that's the case. -- 128.239.146.229 ( talk) 05:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Image:Samadamsovallogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 05:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed this unsourced statement, because in a brief research I found cites for Boston Beer Company being both the largest and second largest American owned brewing company, depending on which hairs you wish to split. Google "largest american owned brewer" for the details, but the upshot is that Pabst is a larger brewing company than Boston Beer, and is American owned, but Pabst does not actually own any breweries, all of their products being contract-brewed by Miller.
So...any ideas on how to handle this in the article?
Buck O'Nollege 01:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Is it really encyclopedic to refer to Bob Cannon as a "Bald-headed, bearded master-brewer"? And besides that, the entire section seems rather worthless to the article. It either needs some serious changes and references added in, or it could just be deleted. Thoughts?-- Metalhead94 ( talk) 20:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Section removed. Even though I don't think it did the article any good, I'm not opposed to it being added back in, if someone could make it sound better and add cites.-- Metalhead94 ( talk) 18:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Just got rid of it again. Dough007 ( talk) 02:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
I didn't see a citation for the following statement: "though today, more than 60% of its beer is produced at the company's Cincinnati brewery". Looked into it and found that Boston Brewery claimed only 35% in 2007. http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/03/31/story14.html I'm new to the editing wikipedia thing, but was doing some research on Sam Adams and would like to hear if anyone has any references for the 60% figure. Jjbauer ( talk) 19:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Who calls this a craft beer.... its owned by Budwiser there is nothing craft beer about corporate brewing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.168.215.26 ( talk) 00:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I believe another beer they make is "Fezziwig Ale" (delicious!) included in the yearly Christmas 12-pack. - Perl guy 03:55, Jun 13, 2004 (UTC)
What would be the best way of adding that it tastes really strong (the classic Boston Lager) but really good without violating "NPOV"? 207.69.140.23 13:11, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Just editing the link so it points in the right direction. Whispering 22:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)disambiguation link repair ( You can help!)
The article claims that certain Adams beers are 26% alcohol. From what I've read, this is an amount of alcohol impossible without distillation. Can someone cite a source for this? If not, I intend to delete all info pertaining to alcohol content in that section.-- Hraefen 05:42, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
It's really hard, but both Sam Adams and Dogfish Head have brewing beers with incredibly high alcohol contents. The question I'm interested in is the difference between Beer and Barleywine, as the page currently has a barley named as the strongest beer. Isn't barleywine its own beverage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.74.242.203 ( talk) 01:06, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
The opening line to this article refers to Sam Adams as a "patriot/traitor (depending on perspective)" I am going to remove the "traitor" reference, it's extremely weird at best. After more than 200 years of American sovereignity it seems odd to take the British colonial perspective when writing about revolutionary war figures. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and other founding fathers are not listed as "traitors" in the opening lines of their respective articles. Samuel Adams was a single participant in a popular uprising against British control-- is every soldier who fought in the war for independence also a "traitor"? If someone wants to include a "Torry" take on Sam Adams somewhere else in the article thats fine by me, but it's messed up to call him a traitor in that first line. LearningKnight 15:58, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Where's the brewery infobox? - Acjelen 03:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
The first link in the external link section requires the reader to be at least 21 years old to veiw the website. I don't know if its good Wikipedia policy to include links that are descriminate based on the age of the reader. I plan on deleting the link unless someone can convince me not to.
I removed the following text that was the "trivia" section:
I doubt that this is true, and is probably vandalism. Please do not restore it unless some citation is found. -- rogerd 19:46, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I'll need to dig up a reference, but I remember reading that Samuel Adams was never a brewer, though he was a a grain malster for a time. Vpoko 23:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't mean to be a jerk, but Samuel Adams really is an independant brewery? I mean when you look at all the St. Patty's day t.v. advertising you notice that the so-called chefs make a three second statement and have only their illegible signature as their only i.d. I mean when Lowenbrau ran their ads as an "imported beer" they were owned by the Miller brewing company. Lowenbrau was brewed and bottled in the United States. The whole thing was a fake. I would not be suprised if Sam Adams is nothing but a Hollywood created gimmick paid for by Miller or Budwieser.
Not going to repeat what it said except that it sounds kinda like something Homer Simpson would say.
I have to take issue with the edit made by 76.202.60.53 on June 27, 2007. What he/she claimed to be "unsupported advertising hyperbole" is in fact just the reality of contract brewing. I don't see any reason to doubt the company's claim, and feel that the sentence as it currently reads uses a weasel word ("claims") to cast doubt on the fact that the Boston Beer Company produces all of their own beer, despite using equipment at other facilities. Thoughts? deciding39 02:04, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I've altered the text someewhat to remove the weasel word ('claims'). The text now reads 'According to the Company...'. Documentreview ( talk) 03:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I noticed this bio Jim Koch, the Sam Adams founder, has been deleted a couple of times as non notable. I would say otherwise given their success. Is anyone game? Chris 03:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone remember the marketing debacle where Jim Koch claimed to be the great great grandson of Samuel Adams? Budweiser(?) attacked him directly in their ads exposing his fraudulent claim. Koch made the mistake of making embarrassing, angry rebuttal ads. This would have been somewhere around 2001-2003
Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find references to this online, but I will never forget the ad war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.154.245 ( talk) 04:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
The article currently states that the Cranberry Lambic is not a true lambic. The lambic article says that lambics are only brewed in a specific region, similar to Champagne. Is this the reason for the caveat on the Cranberry Lambic? Seems like we should say so if that's the case. -- 128.239.146.229 ( talk) 05:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Image:Samadamsovallogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 05:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I removed this unsourced statement, because in a brief research I found cites for Boston Beer Company being both the largest and second largest American owned brewing company, depending on which hairs you wish to split. Google "largest american owned brewer" for the details, but the upshot is that Pabst is a larger brewing company than Boston Beer, and is American owned, but Pabst does not actually own any breweries, all of their products being contract-brewed by Miller.
So...any ideas on how to handle this in the article?
Buck O'Nollege 01:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Is it really encyclopedic to refer to Bob Cannon as a "Bald-headed, bearded master-brewer"? And besides that, the entire section seems rather worthless to the article. It either needs some serious changes and references added in, or it could just be deleted. Thoughts?-- Metalhead94 ( talk) 20:34, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Section removed. Even though I don't think it did the article any good, I'm not opposed to it being added back in, if someone could make it sound better and add cites.-- Metalhead94 ( talk) 18:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Just got rid of it again. Dough007 ( talk) 02:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)