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 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
This page is an archive of the Beer WikiProject talk page for the year 2008. |
How is it possible that we don't even have an article for Falstaff Brewing Company. I think without getting into an arguement, we'd all agree that Falstaff was very, very important to the history of American brewing. Anyone willing to take up the torch for Falstaff? -- Brownings 03:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I may have bumped into a few of you on here and as such you may know I work extensively on WikiProject Food and Drink which is the parent project to this one. As such, I have in an attempt to revive some of the other projects which have softened by revamping their main pages and adding subsidiary pages for better organization and appeal. Now this project has a large following and doesn't necessarily at this point need appeal for new members, but it can never hurt. It will also give the page an ease of use for places to click and get templates along with info on merge proposals, deletion proposals, and other information on the project.
As this project is very active I wanted to talk here first about helping the project by putting it along the format which WikiProject Food and Drink, Wikiproject Wine, WikiProject Foodservice and WikiProject Cheeses are currently under. I'm still finalizing Foodservice and I am offering the same to the remaining projects under Food and Drink as well. Please take a look at the other pages and tell me what you think when you get a chance.-- Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 03:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
As there were no objections I updated the main page, let me know what you think.-- Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 22:17, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
<outdent> Which template do you mean? I was thinking of using similar colors to the one I used in the brewboxen, which I had long ago also used to create my user page. – Clockwork Soul 07:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Looks very good - definitely a beerier color scheme, and much easier on the eyes.
By the way I noticed that somebody cleared the lighter background shade from the brewery brewbox (unless that's another memory thing...). Is the paler color still supposed to be there? I notice it's still there for the beer beerbox. On which subject, I've been wondering: is it appropriate to use the beer beerbox within a brewery page, say in a section about that particular beer? Or is it only meant to sit at the top of an article about a beer itself? -- Daniel11 ( talk) 23:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
I created a beer template for beers within the context of a brewery article. I was working on updating the Great Lakes Brewing Company article and got annoyed with the format so I came up with {{ User:DavidJ710/Template:Beer}}. Let me know what you think, and please feel free to update it with anything you like. If you think this is unnecessary, please discuss, and I'll revert my format changes, but I think this could be useful, especially with some more attention from all of you! DavidJ710| talk 21:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Beer makes an appearance in O'Reilly Media's Wikipedia: The Missing Manual in a chapter about WikiProjects. You can view a preview of the chapter, including a nice screenshot, here, by opening the WikiProjects section in Chapter 9 (I couldn't find a direct link to the section in question). Congratulations to all WikiProject Beer members.
Thanks to author John Broughton for the mention. It looks like a good book! -- Daniel11 ( talk) 03:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Requested article (why is there no "requested articles" section in this project, unlike all others?): Sour ale (currently redirects to Beer style). Badagnani ( talk) 05:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey everyone, I'm asking the Beer Project to try to help cleanup and cite the last few articles in this contribution history [2]. The editor is rather... passionate... about the article for Emerald Coast Beer Company and was recently blocked for sticking an AfD tag on several other brewery articles. I attempted to start a citation effort on the list with Diamond Bear Brewing Company and Rio Salado Brewing Company but I don't really have the will to do more than research one at a time and only every so often. If the Beer Project could get involved in the citation clean-up it would greatly decrease the odds of these breweries ending up at AfD in the future.-- Torchwood Who? ( talk) 16:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, all. I've been developing Igor lately, and have finally gotten to see all of our articles and their assigned importances and whatnot in one place. Right now, they're a little inconsistent, so I'm trying to standardize them a bit. This is what I'm setting for now:
What do you folks think? – Clockwork Soul 17:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Here's another mention of WikiProject Beer. In a fancy paper on Visualizing Activity on Wikipedia with Chromograms, some IBM Research and MIT people make passing reference to us, though not exactly in the most flattering light...
But seriously, it's an interesting paper. -- Daniel11 ( talk) 01:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
There's also a slightly different version here, looks like basically the same thing but without as many illustrations. -- Daniel11 ( talk) 01:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I think we need to do more work on companies that have merged and bought each other. For example, I was looking for MacTarnahan's, a Portland brewery. Turns out MacTarnahan's and Portland Brewing Company were both bought by Pyramid, which was then bought by Magic Hat. None of the pages said anything like that. -- AW ( talk) 21:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
I've been doing a little work on keg stand, and another user decided to merge it into a new article called keg games. Personally, I think a keg stand is its own thing with plenty of references (try Googleing it), whereas keg games is kind of a nebulous term - is it a game involving beer from a keg? A game physically using the keg? I dunno. My suggestion is to have a section in keg with brief mention that there are games that use a keg with references. And if any of those games are notable enough, which I doubt, then make their own articles. Figured this was an organizational thing which would be good to talk to you all about. -- AW ( talk) 21:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
I have recently modified the {{ WPFOOD}} banner so that it supports this project. I did this to unite all the food related projects under a uniform banner as well as cut down on the number of banners that appear at the top of each article talk page. It also allows for a streamlined assessment process where we can help assess articles across the scope of the related WP Food and Drink projects.
Just add the |Beer=yes switch to any {{WikiProject Food and drink}} tag at the top of the article talk page and you will get this:
Food and drink: Beer Unassessed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As you can see, this project is prominently displayed in the banner, and I can add any custom text you would like.
Food and drink: Beer Unassessed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is now functioning properly with assessments carried over to both projects. It is still rough looking at this time.
If there is any questions, please post them not on my page but on the WP Food Banners talk page. Other modifications can be made to the template to allow for custom alterations to the template.
As for the banner, there is currently a bot going through and tagging food and beverage categories.
You don't have to use it, but please consider it. -- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 09:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't care for it and I also don't like that all the WikiProject Beer articles have been tagged with the Food and Drink banner. -- Thetrick ( talk) 17:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I would like to apologize for the poor wording I used as well as my failure to elaborate my ideas for this proposal. Please realize that is all it is, a proposal. I have no intentions to forcibly remove your tag or perform a "hostile" take over of this project, assumptions that couldn't be further from the truth.
As I have stated on the WP Food talk page, I was looking to unite the foodies of WP to accomplish several things:
My reasoning is this:
I have been working with the WPBannerMeta people to find a way to accomplish this in the best way possible and have soliciting the input from these food and drink projects to discover the individual needs of the groups before implementing this. It would be completely voluntary for the group, currently it is only being used on the WP Food task forces and a couple of articles as a test. I have not removed any project tags and will not do so unless given permission.
Any questions, please post them on the banners talk page.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 04:15, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
I need a beer article to test the banner out on, I will be using Narragansett Brewing Company (Good old Heffenreffer!) because it is not incredibly well know and is not very high on the importance scale. Please tell me if there are any problems with this. -- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 03:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Would any one like to have me customize the text for this project? -- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 18:38, 6 July 2008 (UT
I recently found that the WikiProject Hinduism Banner has a function that would place a child project banner as well as the parent project on a talk page using the same format as I have already. The way they have it set up, the switches activate the child banner and place it above the parent project. Would this be acceptable?
You can see an example of what I mean on the Talk:Ocimum tenuiflorum article.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
You can add separate importance ratings in this template, right now I have it set to use the single assessment, but I can easily change it. It is a single switch, you would add the |beer-importance=Top, High etc once I were to turn it on.
Shall I ask HappyMelon to make a test template? It may take a few days. -- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 04:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot ( Disable) 22:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello, all. As most of you are aware, Jerem43 ( talk · contribs) from the Food and Drink project (the parent project of this one) has created an omni-banner that rolls our Wikiproject banner ({{ WikiProject Beer}}) into the food banner, along with many other task forces and descendant projects. This banner, in addition to clearly marking BEER as a child of FOOD, tags its host page as part of the FOOD project, in addition to being part of the BEER project, effectively making all BEER articles FOOD articles as well. An example of this banner is use can be found at Talk:Narragansett Brewing Company.
Please voice your support, opposition, or comments regarding the proposed changes below. Remember, this is a discussion, not a vote, and the goal is to reach a consensus. Finally, while this discussion is intended to ascertain the opinion of BEER project members, input from those in other projects is welcome.
Support
Oppose
Comments
Food and drink: Desserts Unassessed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Food and drink Unassessed | ||||||||||||||
|
Silk, to address your points:
The following is my opinion
BTW, the preceding commentary was not aimed at the members of this project, but the specific commentator mentioned in the opening. I appreciate the chance to get this right that the others in the Beer project have given to me in this endeavor and do not wish to offend them.
All I have asked for is the chance to be legitimately heard based upon the merits of the proposal and not shouted down because I screwed up. Because of my missteps in regards to making this proposal, I believe that to be impossible at this point. I withdraw my proposal from this group.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 22:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Jeremy. I hear what you are saying, and I do apologise for my tone. Much of the frustration which comes through in my tone I think has been built up by the actions and comments of Tinucherian, who instead of listening to the genuine grievances that the Beer project has with this, has been aggressive in accusations of ownership, of removal of tags, and in creating drama with pointy actions this this: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Council#Issues_with_WikiProject_Banner_Tagging. My first communications on this matter were neutral: [3], [4], [5]. And I supported unblocking Tinucherian's Bot: [6]. I'm looking through the various comments I've made on this issue, and I suppose my tone may start to sound frustrated when there is continual and aggressive arguments coming from Tinucherian rather than an attempt, like yourself, to listen to what we are saying. I suppose you have become conflated with Tinucherian in this issue, and for that I do apologise. It is wearisome to put forward legitimate concerns about an action, and then to be accused of having ownership problems, and of being obstructive. I suppose in Tinucherian's defence, the block of the bot must have been frustrating, and some of that frustration has spilled over in dealings with everyone involved in this issue. However, we did not block the bot, all we are doing is - like yourself - talking, and putting forward our concerns. If some tetchy language has slipped in I do completely apologise for that. SilkTork * YES! 07:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Anyone interesting in working for a while on improving the pub articles? Sorting out the stubs. Organising the categories. Creating a Pub InfoBox. Drawing up some kind of notability guideline, and checking that pub articles are meeting the guidelines. Drawing up a Style guideline. Working on the editing of the main articles - Public house, List of public houses in the United Kingdom, Bar (establishment), etc. Considering how to integrate all the drinking establishments around the globe. Perhaps create a new parent article: Drinking establishment. I've started working on the pub articles, but I would really like to work with other people to bounce ideas and keep within consensus. SilkTork * YES! 18:46, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Done See Drinking establishment. Badagnani ( talk) 21:26, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I've started a Pub Taskforce page:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/Pub Taskforce. And I have made an attempt at creating an Infobox, but it's not very good: {{
Infobox Pub}}.
SilkTork *
YES!
11:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
After discussions and advice from other editors, especially those on the Film Project, I have been using this style of ref section as standard:
{{ refbegin}}
{{ reflist}}
{{ refend}}
I use this even where there are no notes/cites, external links or books/articles as it sets up the section properly to start with and hopefully encourages others to use references or list helpful books. I use to use {{
unreferenced}}, but ceased doing so as I thought the reference section itself was enough of a reminder.
What do others think? SilkTork * YES! 21:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
There was a brief discussion last year - [7] - in which it was decided to change the structure of the beer cats in the United States from "Category:Beer and breweries in ***" which nested in "Category:Beer and breweries in the United States" which nested in "Beer and breweries by region" to a system of "Category:Beer brewing companies based in ***" which nests in "Category:Beer brewing companies in the United States by state" which nests in "Category:Beer and breweries in the United States". The previous Beer and breweries cat system was deleted and replaced by the new one.
There were only two people in this discussion who agreed to this change - User:Vegaswikian and User:Hmains, and the change they agreed to was not the one proposed by the nominator.
I came upon some of these changes last year and had a discussion with Vegaswikian [8], and undid some of the changes I discovered. I explained the history of the cat system and how it was based, and directed him to this and this in which it can be seen that there was a wide consensus for the system he wanted to delete, and that the system replaced the varying cat systems used up to that time. Going back to a varied system doesn't seem wise. I also suggested that if Vegaswikian wanted to continue with the change that he had proposed, that we could talk it through here on the project.
He didn't get back to me, nor take up the offer to discus it here, so I felt that was the end of that matter. But today I found more changes, and discovered in fact a quite widespread changing of the cat system. I started to work my way through and make changes, but discovered it was quite widespread, and based on this discussion, which took place after I had spoken with Vegaswikian. He didn't inform me or any of us that he wanted to pursue the changes. His explanation on the CfD was: "This was approved by a previous discussion. In trying to do the changes, one user has been undoing the changes citing a previous discussion. So I'm bring this back here again. The notice for the previous discussion was posted on the the beer project page."
Again that discussion involved very few people (three agreements) - yet it resulted in a decison to delete a significant proportion of our category system and replace it with something else.
If there are to be significant changes to our Cat system I feel we should look at the implications. There may be some merit to what Vegaswikian is proposing, though without him explaining it here with the Project we don't know. When faced with a change that we don't know has taken place we may end up reverting because people do from time to time create odd cats that don't work, and we need to keep the beer category system clean and simple. Communication is important. I'm informing BeerProject members of these changes. Let's talk. SilkTork * YES! 13:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but what "beer" articles are in these categories? I looked through a few, and I only saw breweries. For accuracy, I don't see a problem with the rename. If someone wants to read about beer in Alaska, we could, I suppose, create Category:Beer brewed in Alaska. -- Kbdank71 19:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I was the one who (inadvertently) instigated this mess. My original goal was to rename various US state categories to be consistent with the rest of the tree, eg. Alabama breweries to Beer and breweries in Alabama. At that time some were consistent, some were not. The discussion promptly got out of my control, and I was pulled away from WP at the same time. I feel that 1) the tree should be consistent top to bottom, and 2) that most of the Beer and breweries by US state categories will always be on the sparse side, and that it is pointless to chop them up further into brewing companies, brewing plants, brewery buildings, and whatever else. -- Thetrick ( talk) 19:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I think that the current discussion was more directed at Category:Breweries (buildings) which is a member of Category:Buildings and structures by type part of a rather large classification system for Category:Buildings and structures. Breweries is an ambiguous name in that it refers to the building or the company so the category names need to make this clear. With breweries there are many notable companies but a smaller number of notable buildings. But clearly they need a category that fits into the structure of Category:Buildings and structures. Also there is a well established category of by state classification. Likewise there is a well established Category:Companies based in FooUSstate or Category:Companies of country. Regions are problems since for some countries it is not clear what region they are actually in. I think that several countries are even listed on multiple continents within the wiki. Classification by country is generally a safe way to break up larger groups. Vegaswikian ( talk) 21:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Is the propose change back to a previous catagory system, similar to wine categories? -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 23:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Decision:
1. Return United States back to "Beer and Breweries in A-Z"
2. Change the rest of the world to "Beer brewing companies based in A-Z"
3. Restore "Beer and Breweries in A-Z" for the United States and nest "Beer brewing companies based in A-Z" inside.
I favour option 1.
Option 2 is a lot of work for no gain.
Option 2 would be a compromise, but better than option 2 and better than leaving things as they are.
SilkTork *
YES!
20:09, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Sure, it's a huge faceless corporation, but it seems to me that only good can come of InBev buying out Anheuser-Busch. They're Belgian, after all! – Clockwork Soul 03:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
♠ Nothing will change about the beer; not a single thing. Budweiser is a global winner. You don't mess with that. However, the Busch parks is something I worry about. -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 19:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I heard last December that Redbach is no longer being imported into the US: RodenbachUSA.com seems to be defunct; does anyone know whether it's still being brewed? — Robert Greer ( talk) 23:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Currently, 726 articles are assigned to this project, of which 206, or 28.4%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.
If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 17:08, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Something like IPA should have a standalone article because it is written about by very reliable sources and has several books devoted to it. That's a given. What we actually say about it is a different battle! But, of course it should have a stand alone article.
I agree with Stlemur that the web sources that Clock has listed above are not reliable. That was the caution I gave earlier. But as a starting point for getting together a list, that's fine. I think we should make clear in any guideline/standard that we draw up, that we are not attempting to create a definitive beer style list, but simply guidelines to indicate which styles are notable enough (that is have been written about authoritatively by reliable sources) for standalone articles, and which should be dealt with in a parent article.
As for the articles themselves. I'd like to see the articles contain the views of Europeans and Americans in a balanced manner. Sometimes the beer styles articles have ended up being battlegrounds between these two camps as one opinion or the other has attempted to dominate. There is more than one IPA for example, the modern American IPA is not the same as the historic English IPA which is not the same as the current English IPA - a full awareness of the situation with conflicting views is the best approach, even if that appears less than neat. A prescriptive, closed description - such as that adopted by BJCP, or a purely local or historical perspective as adopted by some Europeans is not helpful, and has been the source of much conflict! Balance and inclusion is the way forward. We are not here, after all, to put forward our own opinions, but to sum up the information that is available out there. SilkTork * YES! 07:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Until we actually have definitive, scholarly, reliable sources which say "these are what beer styles there are, this is how they're related", I propose the following arrangement:
List of beer styles. I like it. Very good start! SilkTork * YES! 07:44, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Seems the list of beer styles and beer styles articles have a lot of redundancy. Here is one article that illustrates the complexity of "style". I find the word "style" to be a poor choice for what it's used for; however, we are stuck with it out of tradition. Style seems a bit ambiguous, and I think that is the crux of the issue that causes most debate. -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 13:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
{{ TaskForce Pubs}} creates {{ TaskForce Pubs}} This is simply a reworded Beer template with a different image, so all links remain as for the main Beer template. SilkTork * YES! 01:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Beer|pubs=yes}} The image is a bit small, but I may be able to fix that. Besides that, what do you think? – Clockwork Soul 20:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Based upon a discussion on the WP Food talk page, a community forum has been set up for the various Food and Drink projects develop a set of Manual of Style guidelines for use in articles under the auspices of the related Food and Drink WikiProjects and their task forces. These guidelines would be similar to the MoS guidelines for biographies or legal topics.
The following pages have created these pages for this purpose:
Upon a general consensus has been reached for each set of standards, we will submit it to the appropriate discussion board for a ratification discussion.
All members of this project are invited to participate.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:53, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
There's a little more to this Kontroverschen. Some have complained that Ron's links represent a conflict of interest, since allegedly he profits from banner ads. There's validity to that, I suppose (although who actually clicks on those!?). And I have a solution: I don't mind adding the link myself. (To help prove I'm not Ron, I'll point to my Texas-oriented contributions.) Dunkelweizen ( talk) 23:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
This thread was prompted by a comment made by a user, in which the user said "He is the owner of several beer websites and he continually replaces valid links with links to the websites that he has a financial interest in." All comments made on Wikipedia remain on the database for ever unless they are oversighted. The comment needs to be addressed and cleared up, not swept under the carpet - however well meaning.
User:Patto1ro - Ron Pattinson - writes the europeanbeerguide.net website. Ron added links to his website when he first joined the site. I feel sure he hasn't done it since he became aware there is a guideline against editors linking to their own website. He has been accused of making these links for financial reasons. However, europeanbeerguide.net is not a commercial website.
I think we can clear the air of any suggestion of wrong-doing by Ron by anyone reading the history of this page, including the person who made the accusation. I strongly support the use of Ron's site as a resource to be placed in the External links section of the appropriate beer articles. The Wikipedia:EL#What_should_be_linked guideline says: "Links to be considered... 4. Sites which fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources." (my emphasis) and Ron's site meets this fully.
However, I am less sure that Ron's site meets the requirements for Wikipedia:Reliable sources, in which we cite europeanbeerguide.net as an authority for a statement in an article. SilkTork * YES! 19:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Wishing they would do so won't make Wikipeia policies against using Wikpedia to promore Ron Pattison's website go away. — goethean ॐ 02:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm just looking at the recent edits to Kvass and its inclusion on Template:Alcoholic beverages. While it is fermented and it does contain a fraction of alcohol...where do we draw the line between a "soft drink" and an "alcoholic beverage"? Many traditional soft drinks, such as ginger beer, root beer, etc. contain a small measure (typically .5% ABV) of alcohol. -- Killing Vector ( talk) 22:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm currently doing some work tidying up the Beers of the World articles which are linked via the {{ Beers of the world}} template. I'm adding an Economy section to each article using www.euromonitor.com as a reference source, and creating new articles, such as Philippines beer where needed and appropriate. I renamed Thai beer as it should have been Thailand beer - but in doing so I renamed it Beer in Thailand. I then realised that all the articles should be renamed "Beer in Foo" as that is the naming convention. Either "Beer in Foo" or "Beer of Foo" or "Beer from Foo". As our cats are already "Beer and breweries in Foo" it seems logical to rename the lead articles "Beer in Foo". If there's no objection to this in the next 7 days I'll make the changes. SilkTork * YES! 22:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
No that is not moving to WP:F&D, but moving it to a discussion board for this subset of the WikiProject Culture/Wiki community as a whole. Just because it is hosted under the WP:F&D project page does not mean it is exclusive to the F&D project, that is why I posted the notice about the standards board on all related projects talk pages.
Currently we don't have any established WP:MoS standards for articles under the auspices of food and drink related WikiProjects, including naming conventions. I was asking you to include this in the discussion on the page that was set up specifically to establish those MoS standards. Once all of the F&D projects have hashed out a set of standards, they will be presented to the whole Wikipedia community for a broader discussion. I believe the WP:Beer's input is necessary in putting together the whole MoS standard, hence the request.
Beyond that there is a MoS proposal that has already been submitted for review by Peter Isotalo for naming conventions (cuisines) that basically covers this topic. Developing a standard for one project that differs from the standards of the others could be problematic in the long run.
Using the Korean cuisine family of articles as an example:
Proposed unified naming: | Your proposed naming structure: |
As you can see there is a smooth progression in the flow of naming of these articles, which fall under the auspices of most of the Food and Beverage WikiProjects ( WP:F&D, WP:BAR, WP:MIX, WP:SD/ WP:C&T and WP:Beer). This former is a logical formatting structure, while the latter throws the naming system off.
I really do think this needs to be thought through fully before renaming the beer articles to your proposed naming structure. By bringing the WP:Beer naming and categorizing structures in line with the other projects would be adventitious to all Wikipedians as well as the visitors to Wikipedia. Renaming and recategorizing them would not be very difficult, it could be done with a simple bot fix. -- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 00:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually, the current WP:F&D convention is correct according to the full policy found here: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (country-specific topics), specifically referring to the "caveats" section:
It is important to be able to differentiate when a topic is actually country-specific. Often what may look like a country adjective is really describing a set of people or a language. Notice that "Polish" may mean "From or related to Poland" or "referring to the Polish people or language." For example Polish language, Polish people, even Polish literature (since these articles most often deal with the literature of the set of people, not the country necessarily). By contrast, Culture of Poland, Politics of Poland and Economy of Poland are all describing the country itself.
Thus subjects that have their origin in a certain country, but are no longer confined to that country use the xxx-ish subject, xxx-ean subject, ad infinitum formats.
I will use Germany as an example. Historically Germany has changed its geographic borders a great deal over the course of history, with Poland and France being on the receiving or taking end. As a result there are parts of the latter two countries having a German culture with a history of German cuisine, German wine and German beer. Thus German beer, the techniques and recipes used to produce it are not only confined to Germany, but is part of these other countries as well. Additionally, according to Modern Marvels, History of Brewing parts 1-3 on the History Channel, German-type beer styles can be found natively in Mexico, Brazil, the US, Canada, Australia and other counties. So in keeping with the MoS guidelines Breweries of Germany is properly named, but the article Beers of Germany would only be correct if the topic was confined to solely to Germany, which it is not. The category Beers of Germany is dead on when classifying beers produced in the country, but again not the subject as a whole.
Unless the article's subject is very narrowly focused, the beer project should probably be using the xxx beer format when dealing with national styles beer, per the MoS.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 14:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I love it! SilkTork * YES! 11:36, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
We have our cleanup list. Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/Cleanup listing. If anyone is bored..... SilkTork * YES! 22:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I've just looked at the criteria for GA status for the Beer article, and I feel that it has a good chance of making it. I have put up the checklist on the Beer talk page - Talk:Beer#Tidying_up_the_article_so_it_can_be_nominated_for_a_GA - and I'll be looking to tidy up the article and see that it meets requirements over the next week or so. Anyone who fancies helping out is most welcome! SilkTork * YES! 00:08, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:10, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
A beer related article, noitulovE, is today on the main page as an FA. It was essentially written by one person - User:GeeJo. It's about the Guinness advert. SilkTork * YES! 10:40, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Beer has been promoted to GA status. Talk:Beer#GA_Review. I'll be looking at what other major article we have that could be promoted to GA with a bit of work. Perhaps Brewery? SilkTork * YES! 18:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
There is some "content discussion" taking place over in the Beer Judge Certification Program article. Some participation from other members of the project would be appreciated. -- Mwalimu59 ( talk) 17:34, 24 November 2008 (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 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
This page is an archive of the Beer WikiProject talk page for the year 2008. |
How is it possible that we don't even have an article for Falstaff Brewing Company. I think without getting into an arguement, we'd all agree that Falstaff was very, very important to the history of American brewing. Anyone willing to take up the torch for Falstaff? -- Brownings 03:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
I may have bumped into a few of you on here and as such you may know I work extensively on WikiProject Food and Drink which is the parent project to this one. As such, I have in an attempt to revive some of the other projects which have softened by revamping their main pages and adding subsidiary pages for better organization and appeal. Now this project has a large following and doesn't necessarily at this point need appeal for new members, but it can never hurt. It will also give the page an ease of use for places to click and get templates along with info on merge proposals, deletion proposals, and other information on the project.
As this project is very active I wanted to talk here first about helping the project by putting it along the format which WikiProject Food and Drink, Wikiproject Wine, WikiProject Foodservice and WikiProject Cheeses are currently under. I'm still finalizing Foodservice and I am offering the same to the remaining projects under Food and Drink as well. Please take a look at the other pages and tell me what you think when you get a chance.-- Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 03:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
As there were no objections I updated the main page, let me know what you think.-- Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 22:17, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
<outdent> Which template do you mean? I was thinking of using similar colors to the one I used in the brewboxen, which I had long ago also used to create my user page. – Clockwork Soul 07:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Looks very good - definitely a beerier color scheme, and much easier on the eyes.
By the way I noticed that somebody cleared the lighter background shade from the brewery brewbox (unless that's another memory thing...). Is the paler color still supposed to be there? I notice it's still there for the beer beerbox. On which subject, I've been wondering: is it appropriate to use the beer beerbox within a brewery page, say in a section about that particular beer? Or is it only meant to sit at the top of an article about a beer itself? -- Daniel11 ( talk) 23:31, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
I created a beer template for beers within the context of a brewery article. I was working on updating the Great Lakes Brewing Company article and got annoyed with the format so I came up with {{ User:DavidJ710/Template:Beer}}. Let me know what you think, and please feel free to update it with anything you like. If you think this is unnecessary, please discuss, and I'll revert my format changes, but I think this could be useful, especially with some more attention from all of you! DavidJ710| talk 21:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Beer makes an appearance in O'Reilly Media's Wikipedia: The Missing Manual in a chapter about WikiProjects. You can view a preview of the chapter, including a nice screenshot, here, by opening the WikiProjects section in Chapter 9 (I couldn't find a direct link to the section in question). Congratulations to all WikiProject Beer members.
Thanks to author John Broughton for the mention. It looks like a good book! -- Daniel11 ( talk) 03:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Requested article (why is there no "requested articles" section in this project, unlike all others?): Sour ale (currently redirects to Beer style). Badagnani ( talk) 05:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey everyone, I'm asking the Beer Project to try to help cleanup and cite the last few articles in this contribution history [2]. The editor is rather... passionate... about the article for Emerald Coast Beer Company and was recently blocked for sticking an AfD tag on several other brewery articles. I attempted to start a citation effort on the list with Diamond Bear Brewing Company and Rio Salado Brewing Company but I don't really have the will to do more than research one at a time and only every so often. If the Beer Project could get involved in the citation clean-up it would greatly decrease the odds of these breweries ending up at AfD in the future.-- Torchwood Who? ( talk) 16:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, all. I've been developing Igor lately, and have finally gotten to see all of our articles and their assigned importances and whatnot in one place. Right now, they're a little inconsistent, so I'm trying to standardize them a bit. This is what I'm setting for now:
What do you folks think? – Clockwork Soul 17:58, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Here's another mention of WikiProject Beer. In a fancy paper on Visualizing Activity on Wikipedia with Chromograms, some IBM Research and MIT people make passing reference to us, though not exactly in the most flattering light...
But seriously, it's an interesting paper. -- Daniel11 ( talk) 01:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
There's also a slightly different version here, looks like basically the same thing but without as many illustrations. -- Daniel11 ( talk) 01:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I think we need to do more work on companies that have merged and bought each other. For example, I was looking for MacTarnahan's, a Portland brewery. Turns out MacTarnahan's and Portland Brewing Company were both bought by Pyramid, which was then bought by Magic Hat. None of the pages said anything like that. -- AW ( talk) 21:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
I've been doing a little work on keg stand, and another user decided to merge it into a new article called keg games. Personally, I think a keg stand is its own thing with plenty of references (try Googleing it), whereas keg games is kind of a nebulous term - is it a game involving beer from a keg? A game physically using the keg? I dunno. My suggestion is to have a section in keg with brief mention that there are games that use a keg with references. And if any of those games are notable enough, which I doubt, then make their own articles. Figured this was an organizational thing which would be good to talk to you all about. -- AW ( talk) 21:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
I have recently modified the {{ WPFOOD}} banner so that it supports this project. I did this to unite all the food related projects under a uniform banner as well as cut down on the number of banners that appear at the top of each article talk page. It also allows for a streamlined assessment process where we can help assess articles across the scope of the related WP Food and Drink projects.
Just add the |Beer=yes switch to any {{WikiProject Food and drink}} tag at the top of the article talk page and you will get this:
Food and drink: Beer Unassessed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As you can see, this project is prominently displayed in the banner, and I can add any custom text you would like.
Food and drink: Beer Unassessed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is now functioning properly with assessments carried over to both projects. It is still rough looking at this time.
If there is any questions, please post them not on my page but on the WP Food Banners talk page. Other modifications can be made to the template to allow for custom alterations to the template.
As for the banner, there is currently a bot going through and tagging food and beverage categories.
You don't have to use it, but please consider it. -- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 09:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't care for it and I also don't like that all the WikiProject Beer articles have been tagged with the Food and Drink banner. -- Thetrick ( talk) 17:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
I would like to apologize for the poor wording I used as well as my failure to elaborate my ideas for this proposal. Please realize that is all it is, a proposal. I have no intentions to forcibly remove your tag or perform a "hostile" take over of this project, assumptions that couldn't be further from the truth.
As I have stated on the WP Food talk page, I was looking to unite the foodies of WP to accomplish several things:
My reasoning is this:
I have been working with the WPBannerMeta people to find a way to accomplish this in the best way possible and have soliciting the input from these food and drink projects to discover the individual needs of the groups before implementing this. It would be completely voluntary for the group, currently it is only being used on the WP Food task forces and a couple of articles as a test. I have not removed any project tags and will not do so unless given permission.
Any questions, please post them on the banners talk page.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 04:15, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
I need a beer article to test the banner out on, I will be using Narragansett Brewing Company (Good old Heffenreffer!) because it is not incredibly well know and is not very high on the importance scale. Please tell me if there are any problems with this. -- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 03:50, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Would any one like to have me customize the text for this project? -- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 18:38, 6 July 2008 (UT
I recently found that the WikiProject Hinduism Banner has a function that would place a child project banner as well as the parent project on a talk page using the same format as I have already. The way they have it set up, the switches activate the child banner and place it above the parent project. Would this be acceptable?
You can see an example of what I mean on the Talk:Ocimum tenuiflorum article.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
You can add separate importance ratings in this template, right now I have it set to use the single assessment, but I can easily change it. It is a single switch, you would add the |beer-importance=Top, High etc once I were to turn it on.
Shall I ask HappyMelon to make a test template? It may take a few days. -- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 04:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.
Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot ( Disable) 22:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello, all. As most of you are aware, Jerem43 ( talk · contribs) from the Food and Drink project (the parent project of this one) has created an omni-banner that rolls our Wikiproject banner ({{ WikiProject Beer}}) into the food banner, along with many other task forces and descendant projects. This banner, in addition to clearly marking BEER as a child of FOOD, tags its host page as part of the FOOD project, in addition to being part of the BEER project, effectively making all BEER articles FOOD articles as well. An example of this banner is use can be found at Talk:Narragansett Brewing Company.
Please voice your support, opposition, or comments regarding the proposed changes below. Remember, this is a discussion, not a vote, and the goal is to reach a consensus. Finally, while this discussion is intended to ascertain the opinion of BEER project members, input from those in other projects is welcome.
Support
Oppose
Comments
Food and drink: Desserts Unassessed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Food and drink Unassessed | ||||||||||||||
|
Silk, to address your points:
The following is my opinion
BTW, the preceding commentary was not aimed at the members of this project, but the specific commentator mentioned in the opening. I appreciate the chance to get this right that the others in the Beer project have given to me in this endeavor and do not wish to offend them.
All I have asked for is the chance to be legitimately heard based upon the merits of the proposal and not shouted down because I screwed up. Because of my missteps in regards to making this proposal, I believe that to be impossible at this point. I withdraw my proposal from this group.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 22:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Jeremy. I hear what you are saying, and I do apologise for my tone. Much of the frustration which comes through in my tone I think has been built up by the actions and comments of Tinucherian, who instead of listening to the genuine grievances that the Beer project has with this, has been aggressive in accusations of ownership, of removal of tags, and in creating drama with pointy actions this this: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Council#Issues_with_WikiProject_Banner_Tagging. My first communications on this matter were neutral: [3], [4], [5]. And I supported unblocking Tinucherian's Bot: [6]. I'm looking through the various comments I've made on this issue, and I suppose my tone may start to sound frustrated when there is continual and aggressive arguments coming from Tinucherian rather than an attempt, like yourself, to listen to what we are saying. I suppose you have become conflated with Tinucherian in this issue, and for that I do apologise. It is wearisome to put forward legitimate concerns about an action, and then to be accused of having ownership problems, and of being obstructive. I suppose in Tinucherian's defence, the block of the bot must have been frustrating, and some of that frustration has spilled over in dealings with everyone involved in this issue. However, we did not block the bot, all we are doing is - like yourself - talking, and putting forward our concerns. If some tetchy language has slipped in I do completely apologise for that. SilkTork * YES! 07:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Anyone interesting in working for a while on improving the pub articles? Sorting out the stubs. Organising the categories. Creating a Pub InfoBox. Drawing up some kind of notability guideline, and checking that pub articles are meeting the guidelines. Drawing up a Style guideline. Working on the editing of the main articles - Public house, List of public houses in the United Kingdom, Bar (establishment), etc. Considering how to integrate all the drinking establishments around the globe. Perhaps create a new parent article: Drinking establishment. I've started working on the pub articles, but I would really like to work with other people to bounce ideas and keep within consensus. SilkTork * YES! 18:46, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
Done See Drinking establishment. Badagnani ( talk) 21:26, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I've started a Pub Taskforce page:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/Pub Taskforce. And I have made an attempt at creating an Infobox, but it's not very good: {{
Infobox Pub}}.
SilkTork *
YES!
11:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
After discussions and advice from other editors, especially those on the Film Project, I have been using this style of ref section as standard:
{{ refbegin}}
{{ reflist}}
{{ refend}}
I use this even where there are no notes/cites, external links or books/articles as it sets up the section properly to start with and hopefully encourages others to use references or list helpful books. I use to use {{
unreferenced}}, but ceased doing so as I thought the reference section itself was enough of a reminder.
What do others think? SilkTork * YES! 21:34, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
There was a brief discussion last year - [7] - in which it was decided to change the structure of the beer cats in the United States from "Category:Beer and breweries in ***" which nested in "Category:Beer and breweries in the United States" which nested in "Beer and breweries by region" to a system of "Category:Beer brewing companies based in ***" which nests in "Category:Beer brewing companies in the United States by state" which nests in "Category:Beer and breweries in the United States". The previous Beer and breweries cat system was deleted and replaced by the new one.
There were only two people in this discussion who agreed to this change - User:Vegaswikian and User:Hmains, and the change they agreed to was not the one proposed by the nominator.
I came upon some of these changes last year and had a discussion with Vegaswikian [8], and undid some of the changes I discovered. I explained the history of the cat system and how it was based, and directed him to this and this in which it can be seen that there was a wide consensus for the system he wanted to delete, and that the system replaced the varying cat systems used up to that time. Going back to a varied system doesn't seem wise. I also suggested that if Vegaswikian wanted to continue with the change that he had proposed, that we could talk it through here on the project.
He didn't get back to me, nor take up the offer to discus it here, so I felt that was the end of that matter. But today I found more changes, and discovered in fact a quite widespread changing of the cat system. I started to work my way through and make changes, but discovered it was quite widespread, and based on this discussion, which took place after I had spoken with Vegaswikian. He didn't inform me or any of us that he wanted to pursue the changes. His explanation on the CfD was: "This was approved by a previous discussion. In trying to do the changes, one user has been undoing the changes citing a previous discussion. So I'm bring this back here again. The notice for the previous discussion was posted on the the beer project page."
Again that discussion involved very few people (three agreements) - yet it resulted in a decison to delete a significant proportion of our category system and replace it with something else.
If there are to be significant changes to our Cat system I feel we should look at the implications. There may be some merit to what Vegaswikian is proposing, though without him explaining it here with the Project we don't know. When faced with a change that we don't know has taken place we may end up reverting because people do from time to time create odd cats that don't work, and we need to keep the beer category system clean and simple. Communication is important. I'm informing BeerProject members of these changes. Let's talk. SilkTork * YES! 13:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but what "beer" articles are in these categories? I looked through a few, and I only saw breweries. For accuracy, I don't see a problem with the rename. If someone wants to read about beer in Alaska, we could, I suppose, create Category:Beer brewed in Alaska. -- Kbdank71 19:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I was the one who (inadvertently) instigated this mess. My original goal was to rename various US state categories to be consistent with the rest of the tree, eg. Alabama breweries to Beer and breweries in Alabama. At that time some were consistent, some were not. The discussion promptly got out of my control, and I was pulled away from WP at the same time. I feel that 1) the tree should be consistent top to bottom, and 2) that most of the Beer and breweries by US state categories will always be on the sparse side, and that it is pointless to chop them up further into brewing companies, brewing plants, brewery buildings, and whatever else. -- Thetrick ( talk) 19:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I think that the current discussion was more directed at Category:Breweries (buildings) which is a member of Category:Buildings and structures by type part of a rather large classification system for Category:Buildings and structures. Breweries is an ambiguous name in that it refers to the building or the company so the category names need to make this clear. With breweries there are many notable companies but a smaller number of notable buildings. But clearly they need a category that fits into the structure of Category:Buildings and structures. Also there is a well established category of by state classification. Likewise there is a well established Category:Companies based in FooUSstate or Category:Companies of country. Regions are problems since for some countries it is not clear what region they are actually in. I think that several countries are even listed on multiple continents within the wiki. Classification by country is generally a safe way to break up larger groups. Vegaswikian ( talk) 21:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Is the propose change back to a previous catagory system, similar to wine categories? -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 23:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Decision:
1. Return United States back to "Beer and Breweries in A-Z"
2. Change the rest of the world to "Beer brewing companies based in A-Z"
3. Restore "Beer and Breweries in A-Z" for the United States and nest "Beer brewing companies based in A-Z" inside.
I favour option 1.
Option 2 is a lot of work for no gain.
Option 2 would be a compromise, but better than option 2 and better than leaving things as they are.
SilkTork *
YES!
20:09, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Sure, it's a huge faceless corporation, but it seems to me that only good can come of InBev buying out Anheuser-Busch. They're Belgian, after all! – Clockwork Soul 03:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
♠ Nothing will change about the beer; not a single thing. Budweiser is a global winner. You don't mess with that. However, the Busch parks is something I worry about. -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 19:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I heard last December that Redbach is no longer being imported into the US: RodenbachUSA.com seems to be defunct; does anyone know whether it's still being brewed? — Robert Greer ( talk) 23:29, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Currently, 726 articles are assigned to this project, of which 206, or 28.4%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.
If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. -- B. Wolterding ( talk) 17:08, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
Something like IPA should have a standalone article because it is written about by very reliable sources and has several books devoted to it. That's a given. What we actually say about it is a different battle! But, of course it should have a stand alone article.
I agree with Stlemur that the web sources that Clock has listed above are not reliable. That was the caution I gave earlier. But as a starting point for getting together a list, that's fine. I think we should make clear in any guideline/standard that we draw up, that we are not attempting to create a definitive beer style list, but simply guidelines to indicate which styles are notable enough (that is have been written about authoritatively by reliable sources) for standalone articles, and which should be dealt with in a parent article.
As for the articles themselves. I'd like to see the articles contain the views of Europeans and Americans in a balanced manner. Sometimes the beer styles articles have ended up being battlegrounds between these two camps as one opinion or the other has attempted to dominate. There is more than one IPA for example, the modern American IPA is not the same as the historic English IPA which is not the same as the current English IPA - a full awareness of the situation with conflicting views is the best approach, even if that appears less than neat. A prescriptive, closed description - such as that adopted by BJCP, or a purely local or historical perspective as adopted by some Europeans is not helpful, and has been the source of much conflict! Balance and inclusion is the way forward. We are not here, after all, to put forward our own opinions, but to sum up the information that is available out there. SilkTork * YES! 07:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Until we actually have definitive, scholarly, reliable sources which say "these are what beer styles there are, this is how they're related", I propose the following arrangement:
List of beer styles. I like it. Very good start! SilkTork * YES! 07:44, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Seems the list of beer styles and beer styles articles have a lot of redundancy. Here is one article that illustrates the complexity of "style". I find the word "style" to be a poor choice for what it's used for; however, we are stuck with it out of tradition. Style seems a bit ambiguous, and I think that is the crux of the issue that causes most debate. -- THE FOUNDERS INTENT PRAISE 13:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
{{ TaskForce Pubs}} creates {{ TaskForce Pubs}} This is simply a reworded Beer template with a different image, so all links remain as for the main Beer template. SilkTork * YES! 01:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
{{WikiProject Beer|pubs=yes}} The image is a bit small, but I may be able to fix that. Besides that, what do you think? – Clockwork Soul 20:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Based upon a discussion on the WP Food talk page, a community forum has been set up for the various Food and Drink projects develop a set of Manual of Style guidelines for use in articles under the auspices of the related Food and Drink WikiProjects and their task forces. These guidelines would be similar to the MoS guidelines for biographies or legal topics.
The following pages have created these pages for this purpose:
Upon a general consensus has been reached for each set of standards, we will submit it to the appropriate discussion board for a ratification discussion.
All members of this project are invited to participate.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 02:53, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
There's a little more to this Kontroverschen. Some have complained that Ron's links represent a conflict of interest, since allegedly he profits from banner ads. There's validity to that, I suppose (although who actually clicks on those!?). And I have a solution: I don't mind adding the link myself. (To help prove I'm not Ron, I'll point to my Texas-oriented contributions.) Dunkelweizen ( talk) 23:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
This thread was prompted by a comment made by a user, in which the user said "He is the owner of several beer websites and he continually replaces valid links with links to the websites that he has a financial interest in." All comments made on Wikipedia remain on the database for ever unless they are oversighted. The comment needs to be addressed and cleared up, not swept under the carpet - however well meaning.
User:Patto1ro - Ron Pattinson - writes the europeanbeerguide.net website. Ron added links to his website when he first joined the site. I feel sure he hasn't done it since he became aware there is a guideline against editors linking to their own website. He has been accused of making these links for financial reasons. However, europeanbeerguide.net is not a commercial website.
I think we can clear the air of any suggestion of wrong-doing by Ron by anyone reading the history of this page, including the person who made the accusation. I strongly support the use of Ron's site as a resource to be placed in the External links section of the appropriate beer articles. The Wikipedia:EL#What_should_be_linked guideline says: "Links to be considered... 4. Sites which fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources." (my emphasis) and Ron's site meets this fully.
However, I am less sure that Ron's site meets the requirements for Wikipedia:Reliable sources, in which we cite europeanbeerguide.net as an authority for a statement in an article. SilkTork * YES! 19:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Wishing they would do so won't make Wikipeia policies against using Wikpedia to promore Ron Pattison's website go away. — goethean ॐ 02:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I'm just looking at the recent edits to Kvass and its inclusion on Template:Alcoholic beverages. While it is fermented and it does contain a fraction of alcohol...where do we draw the line between a "soft drink" and an "alcoholic beverage"? Many traditional soft drinks, such as ginger beer, root beer, etc. contain a small measure (typically .5% ABV) of alcohol. -- Killing Vector ( talk) 22:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm currently doing some work tidying up the Beers of the World articles which are linked via the {{ Beers of the world}} template. I'm adding an Economy section to each article using www.euromonitor.com as a reference source, and creating new articles, such as Philippines beer where needed and appropriate. I renamed Thai beer as it should have been Thailand beer - but in doing so I renamed it Beer in Thailand. I then realised that all the articles should be renamed "Beer in Foo" as that is the naming convention. Either "Beer in Foo" or "Beer of Foo" or "Beer from Foo". As our cats are already "Beer and breweries in Foo" it seems logical to rename the lead articles "Beer in Foo". If there's no objection to this in the next 7 days I'll make the changes. SilkTork * YES! 22:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
No that is not moving to WP:F&D, but moving it to a discussion board for this subset of the WikiProject Culture/Wiki community as a whole. Just because it is hosted under the WP:F&D project page does not mean it is exclusive to the F&D project, that is why I posted the notice about the standards board on all related projects talk pages.
Currently we don't have any established WP:MoS standards for articles under the auspices of food and drink related WikiProjects, including naming conventions. I was asking you to include this in the discussion on the page that was set up specifically to establish those MoS standards. Once all of the F&D projects have hashed out a set of standards, they will be presented to the whole Wikipedia community for a broader discussion. I believe the WP:Beer's input is necessary in putting together the whole MoS standard, hence the request.
Beyond that there is a MoS proposal that has already been submitted for review by Peter Isotalo for naming conventions (cuisines) that basically covers this topic. Developing a standard for one project that differs from the standards of the others could be problematic in the long run.
Using the Korean cuisine family of articles as an example:
Proposed unified naming: | Your proposed naming structure: |
As you can see there is a smooth progression in the flow of naming of these articles, which fall under the auspices of most of the Food and Beverage WikiProjects ( WP:F&D, WP:BAR, WP:MIX, WP:SD/ WP:C&T and WP:Beer). This former is a logical formatting structure, while the latter throws the naming system off.
I really do think this needs to be thought through fully before renaming the beer articles to your proposed naming structure. By bringing the WP:Beer naming and categorizing structures in line with the other projects would be adventitious to all Wikipedians as well as the visitors to Wikipedia. Renaming and recategorizing them would not be very difficult, it could be done with a simple bot fix. -- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 00:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Actually, the current WP:F&D convention is correct according to the full policy found here: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (country-specific topics), specifically referring to the "caveats" section:
It is important to be able to differentiate when a topic is actually country-specific. Often what may look like a country adjective is really describing a set of people or a language. Notice that "Polish" may mean "From or related to Poland" or "referring to the Polish people or language." For example Polish language, Polish people, even Polish literature (since these articles most often deal with the literature of the set of people, not the country necessarily). By contrast, Culture of Poland, Politics of Poland and Economy of Poland are all describing the country itself.
Thus subjects that have their origin in a certain country, but are no longer confined to that country use the xxx-ish subject, xxx-ean subject, ad infinitum formats.
I will use Germany as an example. Historically Germany has changed its geographic borders a great deal over the course of history, with Poland and France being on the receiving or taking end. As a result there are parts of the latter two countries having a German culture with a history of German cuisine, German wine and German beer. Thus German beer, the techniques and recipes used to produce it are not only confined to Germany, but is part of these other countries as well. Additionally, according to Modern Marvels, History of Brewing parts 1-3 on the History Channel, German-type beer styles can be found natively in Mexico, Brazil, the US, Canada, Australia and other counties. So in keeping with the MoS guidelines Breweries of Germany is properly named, but the article Beers of Germany would only be correct if the topic was confined to solely to Germany, which it is not. The category Beers of Germany is dead on when classifying beers produced in the country, but again not the subject as a whole.
Unless the article's subject is very narrowly focused, the beer project should probably be using the xxx beer format when dealing with national styles beer, per the MoS.
-- Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 14:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I love it! SilkTork * YES! 11:36, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
We have our cleanup list. Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/Cleanup listing. If anyone is bored..... SilkTork * YES! 22:32, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I've just looked at the criteria for GA status for the Beer article, and I feel that it has a good chance of making it. I have put up the checklist on the Beer talk page - Talk:Beer#Tidying_up_the_article_so_it_can_be_nominated_for_a_GA - and I'll be looking to tidy up the article and see that it meets requirements over the next week or so. Anyone who fancies helping out is most welcome! SilkTork * YES! 00:08, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.
We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.
A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.
We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:10, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
A beer related article, noitulovE, is today on the main page as an FA. It was essentially written by one person - User:GeeJo. It's about the Guinness advert. SilkTork * YES! 10:40, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Beer has been promoted to GA status. Talk:Beer#GA_Review. I'll be looking at what other major article we have that could be promoted to GA with a bit of work. Perhaps Brewery? SilkTork * YES! 18:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
There is some "content discussion" taking place over in the Beer Judge Certification Program article. Some participation from other members of the project would be appreciated. -- Mwalimu59 ( talk) 17:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC)