|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch) article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- 1 Off flavors comment
- 2 Meaning?
- 3 File:Budweiser beverage delivery truck Romulus Michigan.JPG Nominated for Deletion
- 4 Vandalism
- 5 File:A bottle of Budweiser.JPG Nominated for Deletion
- 6 hey,30% or 80% rice ?
- 7 Italics
- 8 "Even Adolphus Busch didn't like it.." Is this credible?
- 9 Adding information about cans under the "Containers and packaging" section
- 10 Brazilian's Budweiser bill=
- 11 Requested move
Off flavors comment
"...giving it more time to reabsorb and process green beer flavors, such as acetaldehyde and diacetyl, that Anheuser-Busch believes are off-flavors which detract from overall drinkability..."
It is not debated that those chemicals are off flavors at all. There are no styles where acetaldehyde (green apple) flavor is acceptable, and only a handful of beer styles where diacetyl is acceptable (always in very small amounts). You could consult the Beer Judge Certification program style guide (www.bjcp.org) as a source for desired flavors in beer.
I only say all this because I think the clause"anheuser-busch believes..." should be removed since it implies that only AB considers them flaws and they are otherwise not generally considered flaws. Seems almost biased against AB. You could completely remove that clause and still keep the entire meaning of the rest of the statement. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 01:35, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
"The Czech Budweiser is sold in some countries as Budejovicky Budvar but is known as Budweiser throughout." Thoughout what or where? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 05:17, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
File:Budweiser beverage delivery truck Romulus Michigan.JPG Nominated for Deletion
|An image used in this article, File:Budweiser beverage delivery truck Romulus Michigan.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011
|A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.|
File:A bottle of Budweiser.JPG Nominated for Deletion
|An image used in this article, File:A bottle of Budweiser.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
hey,30% or 80% rice ?
I remember a few years ago is 80% rice , why 30% now ? Anheuser Busch was one of them. They survived by converting to cereal beer made from non-fermentable grains like rice. Anheuser still makes its Budweiser from 80% rice, unlike the traditional all-malted barley beer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 07:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
You really need a citation for that. Any beer with 80% rice would be virtually unfermentable. Rice has almost no sugar so it would be next to impossible to make a ~4% abv beer with 80% adjunct 126.96.36.199 (talk) 01:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- Good question, it's half italics, half not italics. CTJF83 15:36, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
"Even Adolphus Busch didn't like it.." Is this credible?
This comment, located under the "Beer" section, cites this article, but the article does not cite any credible source (it actually has no citation.) The article, from Salon.com, says, "Adolphus Busch, the dynasty’s founder, called his beer “dot schlop” and drank wine instead.", but I cannot find any information beyond this (except for internet hearsay.) Unless this is a credible claim, and someone has a more credible source, I think that comment should be taken out because it adds little to the article and cannot be verified. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 07:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC) *Edit - forgot to sign* 184.108.40.206 (talk) 08:03, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- It's a slander. Busch may well have preferred to drink wine (so what) but the "dot schlop" comment was really a *self-deprecating joke* that he made when a dinner companion ordered a Budweiser in his presence. He wasn't going around secretly cackling about getting the rubes to drink "dot schlop." He was *making a joke.* (the source is *American Mercury*, 1929, quoted [here.](http://www.beerhistory.com/library/holdings/kingofbeer3.shtml)
- Yeah, Bud is quite bland, but anyone who thinks you can hide bad ingredients or technique in such a bland beer doesn't know anything about brewing. It's a boring beer made very well. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 04:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Adding information about cans under the "Containers and packaging" section
The current article goes into some depth about the Budweiser bottle, but almost entirely ignores other types of packaging. I was planning on adding information specifically related to Budweiser can packaging. Much of this information will be tailored to look at the latest can design change that occurred in 2011, as well as the reasons and possible consequences of the change. Also, I plan on adding a chart, similar to that under the "Bottle" section, for the can. Zlaval (talk) 00:30, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Brazilian's Budweiser bill=
After numerous deaths in football stadiums, Brazil passed a law in 2003 outlawing alcohol sales in stadiums. FIFA demanded that Brazil allow alcohol sales at the World Cup because Budweiser is a major World Cup sponsor and so it can make Budweiser the "Official Beer of the FIFA World Cup", a role it has played since 1986. In response, Brazil passed a law paving the way for alcohol sales in the World Cup, nicknamed the "Budweiser Bill".
- Brazil Moves To Ease Soccer Beer Ban, As World Cup Spat With FIFA Grows, NPR (March 07, 2012).
- Brazilian Senate approves ‘Budweiser bill’ ending dispute with FIFA over World Cup sponsoring, Merco Press, (May 10, 2012).
|It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.
A bot will list this discussion on Wikipedia:Requested moves within half an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached. For information about closing discussions, see WP:Requested moves/Closing instructions. Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.
- On the face of it oppose - there's no one topic that outnumbers all others put together. but what is going on here? In ictu oculi (talk) 14:58, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support, clear primary topic among a collection of also-rans. bd2412 T 15:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support. Clear cut primary topic. Calidum Talk To Me 15:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - Both are big selling beers with very similar names, the current disambiguation works just fine. There is no evidence to suggest that either is the primary topic as search results will bring up both beers in the search results. Also moving the American beer to the article "Budweiser" would be making Wikipedia take sides in the "Budweiser trademark dispute" and Wikipedia should remain neutral on such issues and not favour either side. IJA (talk) 19:35, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose IJA makes a very good case. WP should remain neutral bearing in mind the long-running trademark dispute. Edwardx (talk) 21:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- A trademark dispute is a poor reason for dictating naming conventions. The dispute is between a large beverage company that gets a lot of hits and is referenced by a lot of other articles; and a smaller beverage company that isn't. 21:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Only one article in the list is called simply "Budweiser", i.e. Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch). The others are partial title matches whose relevance vis-à-vis that Budweiser could be considered less, in the spirit of WP:Partial title match. — 01:47, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose per IJA. Instead I suggest that the trademark dispute article be made primary, as the most educational topic. -- 18.104.22.168 (talk) 05:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - While I hate to go against what actually does seem like a fairly clear case of common name, the fairly controversial nature of the topic makes it seem more logical for the Budweiser page to remain a disambiguation page.--Yaksar (let's chat) 17:47, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support - Anyone searching with "Budweiser" is most likely, by far, searching for this topic. A hatnote can handle the others. --В²C ☎ 00:16, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
- Hmm, should we use the first criterion of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, which is page views? Or the second one, which is long-term educational significance? Oh wait, either way it's a rout. Strong support as per both criteria. Red Slash 04:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Comment. Budweiser should just be turned back into a WP:CONCEPTDAB like it was until July this year. See here for what it looked like and the change into a normal dab. Jenks24 (talk) 08:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
- Agree with Jenks24 – revert to that nice broad concept article. Good catch. Wbm1058 (talk) 00:12, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- Also agree, and comment, beer can be a big part of local culture. We have the relatively small and historic Harveys Brewery near us. If a newer multinational company adopted the same name and took over the Wikipedia name space I would be less than impressed.Gregkaye (talk) 19:20, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
- Agree with Jenks24 - returning to the July 2014 version would be the best way to deal with this issue. Edwardx (talk) 14:03, 21 August 2014 (UTC)