![]() | 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 |
This may have been discussed months (years?) back but why is this called a drink? It's a beer is it not? I found that peculiar in the intro. τßōиЄ2001 ( ǂ ) 02:43, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
It's a stout; a stout is a beer; a beer is a drink. JIMp talk· cont 20:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
A beer contains hops,if it does not contain hops it is an ale and unless you take intravenously or absorb it by osmosis it is a drink. 94.196.61.164 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC).
The article under composition says Guinness is pasturised. Is this true in all regions - within Ireland / UK v outside Ireland? Pg633 ( talk) 16:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Most modern beer is either pasteurized or filtered. Before pasteurization, beer still had live yeast in it, often so much so that it was carbonated. Modern beer makers usually pasteurize to kill the yeast or filter it out entirely, then carbonate with pressurized air, either carbon dioxide or nitrogen. A handful of wheat beers, German and Belgian beers still contain live yeast in them, as do some smaller micro breweries' products. Hope this helps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.139.242 ( talk) 01:08, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
There are plenty of non-pasteurised beers out there -- the British "Real Ale" tradition, for instance, forbids pasteurisation. Guinness has been pasteurising beer since the 1930s, with the last non-pasteurised version -- the bottle-conditioned Extra Stout -- being quietly changed for a pasteurised edition in 2000. For non-pasteurised Irish stout, there's The Porterhouse range, among other Irish craft beers. Vernacula ( talk) 17:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Guinness → Guinness Draught — To clarify that this is the brand of beer, and not any other topic with the name Guinness. Editors are including material in the article on the brewery - which is at St. James's Gate Brewery, the company which owns the brands, which is at Diageo, and members of the Guinness family, such as Arthur Guinness. The name of the brand is Guinness Draught, as shown by these links: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] [7] [8] [9] SilkTork * YES! 10:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.a) We will take the word of http://guinness.com for what the suitable name of the brand is. b) If that company does not refer to itself as the "Guinness Draught" or "Guinness Draft" brand, we shall not either. That is the end of the story no matter where you read different. If the company refers to itself as "Guinness" (for instance) we shall be refering to it as just that to be correct and no more. Nothing else. Maximum, ad finitum.
I appologise if my arrogance prevents anybody doing just what makes them feel good and right. I am often wrong myself. That is just tuff. ~ R. T. G 20:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Do not modify tags are designed to enclose pages on AfD and Requested Moves pages to archive a whole page. I request here for all to see that the above discussion not be prevented from further debate as such pevention is un-Wiki-like and furthermore unnessecary. Even if this was a Requsted Move page, which it is not, it would be bad form and unnacceptable for the person opening the debate to close it. SilkTork has continiued the debate here and the suggestion that the matter is closed to discussion is misleading at least and unfair at best. ~ R. T. G 17:46, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
"Also known as" sections are best used where some confusion maybe be encountered. "Chips, also known as french fries" is a good one. "Engine, also known as steam engine, combustion engine and electric engine" is overuse. ~ R. T. G 17:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
The reference to the Flann O'Brien line 'A pint of plain is your only man' is irrelevant and misleading. Plain is a different type of drink, once widely available in Ireland and popular because cheaper than real stout. It looks a lot like stout. See the Porterhouse drink 'Plain'. I'm going to remove this bit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.89.27 ( talk) 15:51, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
That's a ridiculous policy. So I can add any rubbish I want to a page and nobody can delete it until they can disprove it? Nonsense! Whoever added this didn't know what they were talking about (and was most likely part of a majority who fail to get that the poem in question is satirical). I, however, am at a loss to disprove the information without wasting a lot more of my precious time, so the misinformation will remain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.214.20 ( talk) 16:32, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
There's an article in The Independent that might be useful for filling out the early history: Happy birthday Guinness! The Black Stuff at 250.
The Irish Times published this highly informative article by the historian Cormac Ó Gráda this week. Ó Gráda went through the folklore archives of the Irish Folklore Commission in UCD and discovered that Guinness is only a relatively very new drink in most parts of Ireland and not something which has been common for even half of the 250 years that Guinness marketeers would like us to think. Whiskey and poitín were the traditional drinks, and even ale was much more common. An eye-opening article for anybody who wants to get beyond the "Irish" claims of this British company. 78.16.212.240 ( talk) 07:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Hmmmm...With your eye for truth and detail will you perhaps help me work just as hard to uncover and develop in story similar clarity say perhaps in something random such as the Irish roots of the "British" Beatles?? Much obliged! 75.249.99.184 ( talk) 04:23, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
added a 'Citation Needed' tag to the explanation of the two-step pour. Think that's fairly reasonable. Anyone know where this explanation came from? Dave ( talk) 02:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
The photograph in this section, while well taken, is of a horribly poured pint. Given that this section is on presentation of the drink maybe a picture representing a proper pint would be better suited. As well presented as this ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Guinness.jpg) but perhaps as well photographed as the existing image. Conorflan ( talk) 14:11, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
how long is Guinness good for in a bottle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.78.248 ( talk) 00:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
QUESTION - Isn't the 2-part pour a marketing myth kept alive by Diageo. I've been told by experienced bartenders that modern methods of pouring do not require a 2-part pour. Are there any articles to verify this and then update the Wikipedia section?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.147.185.109 ( talk) 23:08, 3 June 2012
Ithought I read somewhere that Guinness was first made with burnt coffee. Is there any truth in that ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.113.104 ( talk) 13:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
No, Arthur Guinness based all his testing and creating with other alcoholic drinks he had tasted previous, none involving a caffeine based drink — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
79.97.43.44 (
talk)
01:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
So what? The issue is not so much whether 'a local historian' made such a claim so much as whether it is historically true. The source makes no judgment, and the article is not apparently intended to be taken too seriously. Looks like a fringe theory (if not in fact a silly season spoof) and should be treated accordingly. I don't see why the recent removal shouldn't stand. RashersTierney ( talk) 21:20, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Daily Mail wrote yeasterday that in one pint of Guinness exists one-day norm of B12. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.159.27.170 ( talk) 16:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
was curious as to why an Icon of Ireland has all the old Pub Signs of the Tucan birds ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.76.28 ( talk) 18:28, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
This article does not answer the following. In what year did Guinness move its headquarters from Ireland and become a British company? Why? In what year did it move its primary stock market listing from the ISEQ (Ireland) to the FTSE (Britain)? Does it still have an ISEQ presence? 89.101.41.216 ( talk) 17:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Guinness, amongst others, made use of a Magdalene laundry in its past. I tried to search for this fact on this wiki but couldn't find it. To me it seems that this should be listed, right? AgamemnonZ ( talk) 11:16, 21 March 2013 (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 |
This may have been discussed months (years?) back but why is this called a drink? It's a beer is it not? I found that peculiar in the intro. τßōиЄ2001 ( ǂ ) 02:43, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
It's a stout; a stout is a beer; a beer is a drink. JIMp talk· cont 20:29, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
A beer contains hops,if it does not contain hops it is an ale and unless you take intravenously or absorb it by osmosis it is a drink. 94.196.61.164 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC).
The article under composition says Guinness is pasturised. Is this true in all regions - within Ireland / UK v outside Ireland? Pg633 ( talk) 16:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Most modern beer is either pasteurized or filtered. Before pasteurization, beer still had live yeast in it, often so much so that it was carbonated. Modern beer makers usually pasteurize to kill the yeast or filter it out entirely, then carbonate with pressurized air, either carbon dioxide or nitrogen. A handful of wheat beers, German and Belgian beers still contain live yeast in them, as do some smaller micro breweries' products. Hope this helps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.139.242 ( talk) 01:08, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
There are plenty of non-pasteurised beers out there -- the British "Real Ale" tradition, for instance, forbids pasteurisation. Guinness has been pasteurising beer since the 1930s, with the last non-pasteurised version -- the bottle-conditioned Extra Stout -- being quietly changed for a pasteurised edition in 2000. For non-pasteurised Irish stout, there's The Porterhouse range, among other Irish craft beers. Vernacula ( talk) 17:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Guinness → Guinness Draught — To clarify that this is the brand of beer, and not any other topic with the name Guinness. Editors are including material in the article on the brewery - which is at St. James's Gate Brewery, the company which owns the brands, which is at Diageo, and members of the Guinness family, such as Arthur Guinness. The name of the brand is Guinness Draught, as shown by these links: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] [7] [8] [9] SilkTork * YES! 10:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.a) We will take the word of http://guinness.com for what the suitable name of the brand is. b) If that company does not refer to itself as the "Guinness Draught" or "Guinness Draft" brand, we shall not either. That is the end of the story no matter where you read different. If the company refers to itself as "Guinness" (for instance) we shall be refering to it as just that to be correct and no more. Nothing else. Maximum, ad finitum.
I appologise if my arrogance prevents anybody doing just what makes them feel good and right. I am often wrong myself. That is just tuff. ~ R. T. G 20:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Do not modify tags are designed to enclose pages on AfD and Requested Moves pages to archive a whole page. I request here for all to see that the above discussion not be prevented from further debate as such pevention is un-Wiki-like and furthermore unnessecary. Even if this was a Requsted Move page, which it is not, it would be bad form and unnacceptable for the person opening the debate to close it. SilkTork has continiued the debate here and the suggestion that the matter is closed to discussion is misleading at least and unfair at best. ~ R. T. G 17:46, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
"Also known as" sections are best used where some confusion maybe be encountered. "Chips, also known as french fries" is a good one. "Engine, also known as steam engine, combustion engine and electric engine" is overuse. ~ R. T. G 17:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
The reference to the Flann O'Brien line 'A pint of plain is your only man' is irrelevant and misleading. Plain is a different type of drink, once widely available in Ireland and popular because cheaper than real stout. It looks a lot like stout. See the Porterhouse drink 'Plain'. I'm going to remove this bit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.89.27 ( talk) 15:51, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
That's a ridiculous policy. So I can add any rubbish I want to a page and nobody can delete it until they can disprove it? Nonsense! Whoever added this didn't know what they were talking about (and was most likely part of a majority who fail to get that the poem in question is satirical). I, however, am at a loss to disprove the information without wasting a lot more of my precious time, so the misinformation will remain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.214.20 ( talk) 16:32, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
There's an article in The Independent that might be useful for filling out the early history: Happy birthday Guinness! The Black Stuff at 250.
The Irish Times published this highly informative article by the historian Cormac Ó Gráda this week. Ó Gráda went through the folklore archives of the Irish Folklore Commission in UCD and discovered that Guinness is only a relatively very new drink in most parts of Ireland and not something which has been common for even half of the 250 years that Guinness marketeers would like us to think. Whiskey and poitín were the traditional drinks, and even ale was much more common. An eye-opening article for anybody who wants to get beyond the "Irish" claims of this British company. 78.16.212.240 ( talk) 07:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Hmmmm...With your eye for truth and detail will you perhaps help me work just as hard to uncover and develop in story similar clarity say perhaps in something random such as the Irish roots of the "British" Beatles?? Much obliged! 75.249.99.184 ( talk) 04:23, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
added a 'Citation Needed' tag to the explanation of the two-step pour. Think that's fairly reasonable. Anyone know where this explanation came from? Dave ( talk) 02:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
The photograph in this section, while well taken, is of a horribly poured pint. Given that this section is on presentation of the drink maybe a picture representing a proper pint would be better suited. As well presented as this ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Guinness.jpg) but perhaps as well photographed as the existing image. Conorflan ( talk) 14:11, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
how long is Guinness good for in a bottle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.75.78.248 ( talk) 00:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
QUESTION - Isn't the 2-part pour a marketing myth kept alive by Diageo. I've been told by experienced bartenders that modern methods of pouring do not require a 2-part pour. Are there any articles to verify this and then update the Wikipedia section?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.147.185.109 ( talk) 23:08, 3 June 2012
Ithought I read somewhere that Guinness was first made with burnt coffee. Is there any truth in that ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.113.104 ( talk) 13:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
No, Arthur Guinness based all his testing and creating with other alcoholic drinks he had tasted previous, none involving a caffeine based drink — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
79.97.43.44 (
talk)
01:03, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
So what? The issue is not so much whether 'a local historian' made such a claim so much as whether it is historically true. The source makes no judgment, and the article is not apparently intended to be taken too seriously. Looks like a fringe theory (if not in fact a silly season spoof) and should be treated accordingly. I don't see why the recent removal shouldn't stand. RashersTierney ( talk) 21:20, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Daily Mail wrote yeasterday that in one pint of Guinness exists one-day norm of B12. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.159.27.170 ( talk) 16:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
was curious as to why an Icon of Ireland has all the old Pub Signs of the Tucan birds ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.76.28 ( talk) 18:28, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
This article does not answer the following. In what year did Guinness move its headquarters from Ireland and become a British company? Why? In what year did it move its primary stock market listing from the ISEQ (Ireland) to the FTSE (Britain)? Does it still have an ISEQ presence? 89.101.41.216 ( talk) 17:50, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Guinness, amongst others, made use of a Magdalene laundry in its past. I tried to search for this fact on this wiki but couldn't find it. To me it seems that this should be listed, right? AgamemnonZ ( talk) 11:16, 21 March 2013 (UTC)