Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer/Archive 6

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 4

→

Pageview stats

CAfter a recent request, I added WikiProject Beer to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/Most viewed beer related pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 01:48, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

That link gives a 404 error. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:50, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I've updated the link on the project main page, and it works again. SilkTork *^YES! 18:13, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Is anyone still working here? Just asking because it has been several months since anyone has posted to the talk page which is usually a sign that the project is inactive. I am only asking because several other projects have been so inactive that they are probably going to be merged back into WP:Food. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 06:54, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

The project is not very active, and there is a question as to its current function and direction. Its function as a notice-board for those interested in discussing beer-related articles has not been used much recently, and it's worth discussing the implications of that. One of the options might be to upmerge it to another project, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Companies (as that is more relevant to the majority of articles than WP:Food - the bulk of the articles are about companies that make beer, and the brands they sell; though there are also articles about beer culture, pubs, etc). One aspect of the coverage of the Project is beer as a foodstuff - how it is made, and the different types, etc. So it is conceivable that the categories under beer styles and brewing would fit with WP:Food. But I would hesitate to split up the coverage of these articles into different projects. I feel that this is an appropriate place for people to come if they want to discuss aspects of how to deal with beer related articles on Wikipedia. SilkTork *^YES! 09:15, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, remember, there are several aspects of of WP:Food, including WP:Drink and WP:Foodservice, both of which cover those fields. We also have WP:Bartending and WP:Mixed drinks which also overlap with WP:Beer and WP:Pubs. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 19:57, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree. There are areas which fit food. However, there are areas which fit companies better. SilkTork *^YES! 23:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

New article "Brewing history and process"

Within the past couple of weeks, someone has created a new article called Brewing history and process. It is well written and footnoted, but it seems like a duplication of the existing articles History of beer and Brewing. I don't know what if anything to do about this. I hate to nominate it for deletion because it is a worthy article and somebody put a lot of work into it. The same editor, a newcomer, also inserted a lot of history and process information in the Brewing article. It's possible he is not aware of the History of beer article.

I'm not a member of Project Beer so I don't want to suggest what if anything should be done, but I thought you all should be aware of this duplication and decide if it is appropriate. --MelanieN (talk) 15:57, 17 December 2009 (UTC)MelanieN

Thanks Melanie, I'll look into it. I'll let you know the outcome. SilkTork *^YES! 20:14, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Several editors have done some cleaning on this article, it is now properly cited per WP guidelines. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 03:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

That'll be useful for when I merge the material into the appropriate articles, thanks Jerem. SilkTork *^YES! 09:45, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 02:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/Archive 6/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you.

Update: Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/Archive 6/Unreferenced BLPs has been created. This list, which is updated by User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects daily, will allow your wikiproject to quickly identify unreferenced living person articles.

There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.

If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 01:29, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

I have just checked through and we have no unreferenced BLPs. SilkTork *^YES! 02:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

nice job, Currently your project has zero unreferenced BLPs on this list, that doesn't necessarily mean that all unreferenced BLPs regarding beer are referenced though, there could be a variety of reasons that those unreferenced BLPs do not show up on the list.

One is that those unreferenced BLPs do not have the beer wikiproject template on their talk pages, xeno's bot can help with this.
Another problem could be that the way your project has categories is fragmented, with several categories instead of one main category, which means I would need to add a wild card to the beer listing on the bot page.

If you are interested, sign up for xeno bot, and/or drop a message at the user page of dashbot. thanks. Okip 01:31, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Europeanbeerguide

Hello, I recently noticed the spamming of links to europeanbeerguide.net, and so reverted some of them. I also noticed that it was being used as a reference by several articles. Looking at the website I could see no evidence of reliability, plus I was working from the assumption that they'd been added by a spammer. So, I removed said references. Then I found discussions at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Eurobeerguide/Archive and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive602#www.europeanbeerguide.net that make it clear that the situation is a bit more complex. So, I would revert my deletions of the references, but I'm not really convinced that the website counts as a reliable source. I'm hoping someone here is more in the know. You have it listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/Web resources, but what exactly makes it a reliable source? Regards, --Beloved Freak 11:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Europeanbeerguide is cited by other reliable sources, such as in Martyn Cornell's book Amber, Gold & Black. Ron Pattinson's work is recommended, such as here; and he is a member of The British Guild of Beer Writers. Among beer writers and historians Ron Pattison is respected for his work, and he was selected to be one of the judges for the World Beer Awards. It would be helpful if you did restore any appropriate links to Ron's site. SilkTork *^YES! 17:22, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks - that's what I was looking for! Sorry for my inadvertent disruption, I'll revert those edits now.--Beloved Freak 17:46, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I understand that the recent onslaught of EL additions of Europeanbeerguide has been a Joe job by someone keen to see this website blacklisted, so I support the temporary semi-protect on the Beer in Germany page (a request for which I made a while back which was declined). However, there is really no mistaking the commercial intent of the main page at Europeanbeerguide.net, which very prominently promotes the sale of Pattison's work. Furthermore, I am not sure if this discussion accurately reflects consensus on the use of this site as an appropriate external link. It's main proponent is User:SilkTork, who writes at the top of the thread that s/he "would consider [Pattison] a friend". I think the issue merits further discussion. I personally would love to see a book or two of Pattison's being cited for article content, but do not support the listing of the main page of his website as an external link. We could also discuss the merits of using Europeanbeerguide.net subpages as external links or reliable sources for specific articles. Steamroller Assault (talk) 17:51, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm. Was consensus ever reached on this? SilkTork seems to be saying here that the site shouldn't be used as a referemce / reliable source, which contradicts what is said above. Has the sire changed since then?--Beloved Freak 19:51, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I think I have been consistent that I feel the site is appropriate as an external link within our guidelines, though I am less certain if it meets our requirements as a reliable source. However, having said that, the guys over at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard have accepted similar such sites as long as they are used or positively commented on by other reliable sources, which EBG is. On commercial content our guidelines are that the site should not be primarily for selling services. Many sites carry advertising these days. On knowing Ron Pattison - the beer world is quite small - I know a good number of the writers we use as sources. And that I like and respect Ron Pattison doesn't mean we always agree. I think he may have withdrawn from active editing on Wikipedia because I do not agree with him regarding mention of BJCP. I feel it is appropriate to mention BJCP - he does not. That Pattison took a strong stand against BJCP alienated a number of editors, and that might have precipitated the negative attitude toward linking to his site. The recent sockpuppet accounts adding and re-adding his site may be designed to push his site onto the blacklist. That would be unfortunate as it is useful, and well regarded. SilkTork *^YES! 20:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry if I have misunderstood, but I interpreted your reply to me above, from 26 March, to be saying that the site is definitely a reliable source, and that's why I should restore the links I had originally deleted due to the sockpuppet activity. It seems to me that this site is in a bit of a grey area, and I'll leave it up to those more in the know. I don't know much about beer or the beer world! --Beloved Freak 20:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Some of the links to europeanbeerguide were originally added by Mikebe, who apparently works closely enough with Ron Pattinson that his doing so could be taken as a potential conflict of interest, but that's ancient history at this point and if others sufficiently independent of them think the links are reliable enough to keep then I won't object. I will recuse myself from offering an opinion of my own on the site since I haven't really looked at it that closely, and frankly my experience trying to work with the two of them here left me with no interest or desire to do so. But I'm not about to endorse someone's attempt to "Joe job" the site either. Someone was attempting to do the same by using sockpuppets to make pro-BJCP edits back when that debate was still raging. I didn't endorse the behavior then and I still don't. --mwalimu59 (talk) 21:56, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Missing Breweries

There are tons of missing US Breweries. I could easily insert a list of Pacific Northwest Breweries both past and present but I do not know if or where that would be useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.205.137.221 (talk) 05:52, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to be so slow responding. Beer in the United States could do with some work to build it up. Lists of breweries are, however, frowned upon, so if deciding to add some information about breweries in the Pacific Northwest it would be better to find some reliable sources who give a useful prose overview of the region, and pick out a few breweries that are distinctive, important or notable. There are 184 breweries in the region, so some carefulo research would be needed. Starting points would be: [1], [2], [3], [4], and [5] - and these sources will lead you onto others. It might be possible to break out a stand-alone article from Beer in the United States if you gather enough material from reliable sources. Get in touch if you need more help. SilkTork *^YES! 11:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Brewing Network

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Brewing Network. — goethean ॐ 18:58, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I know nothing about that radio station. The article doesn't present much in the way of reliable sources or rationale for notability, and I'm not sure meets Wikipedia:Notability (web) or Wikipedia:Notability (media). SilkTork *^YES! 10:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Standards for brewery articles

Hello, I just happened upon this Wikiproject and thought I'd sign up. I became curious about whether there was one because I happened to see two brewery articles that were treated rather differently. So, that led me to come here. My question at this point is: does the wikiproject have any sort of guidelines, along the lines of "best practices," in terms of how how to handle articles about breweries? For instance, Victory Brewing Company lists pretty much every beer in their line in the body of the article, while Arcadia Brewing Company has it in a template along the right side. I'm thinking it might be a good project to clean up and attempt to standardize some of these articles so that they're at least attempting to cover the same type of information and in the same format, to the extent possible. In any case, glad to be aboard. — e. ripley\^talk 19:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi. The Project has quietened down for the past year or more. There may be several reasons for that - though it is largely felt that some wearisome battles between a handful of individuals over the status of BJCP as a source was responsible for driving people away. We do have some guidelines that I drew up from discussions we had a few years ago when the Project was very active. The Wikipedia:WikiProject_Beer page is the menu for our sub-pages, including Wikipedia:WikiProject_Beer/Guidelines where the WP:Brewery article guideline is kept. We had several discussions about beer lists and drew up WP:BeerList, in which lists of brands are discouraged - it is better for people to write informative details about the main brands. If you find an article with a template listing brands, then that article is displaying an inappropriate template - our main templates are listed here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/templates. {{Infobox Company}} is the appropriate one for brewery articles, and that doesn't list brands.

You are very welcome to the Project, and please do set about cleaning up the articles. There is a list - Wikipedia:WikiProject_Beer/Cleanup_listing if you like working from lists; though feel free to just jump in anywhere that takes your fancy. I'm currently very slowly trying to build up Brewing and get it reliably sourced so I can put it forward for GA listing. Help with sourcing that would be much appreciated! I don't get as much time to work on the beer articles as I once did. SilkTork *^YES! 23:17, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

It seems like a lot of the ones I'm encountering are using {{Infobox Brewery}}, for what that's worth. — e. ripley\^talk 20:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes - most brewery articles will have been set up with the older {{Infobox Brewery}} before we moved to {{Infobox Company}}. It takes a while to change over infoboxes, and hasn't been a high priority. In the meantime when people set up a new brewery article they will look at other brewery articles for guidance, and as most contain {{Infobox Brewery}} it just gets perpetuated! I think most of the main brewery articles use {{Infobox Company}} as they are edited more, are higher profile, and that's where the trend to use the generic company infobox started - it was either edit war over the infobox or go with the bigger consensus of the general Wikipedia community. SilkTork *^YES! 10:00, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Beer articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Beer articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 22:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 19:59, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Awesome! Thank you! SilkTork *^YES! 16:25, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to participate!

Hello! As you may be aware, the Wikimedia Foundation is gearing up for our annual fundraiser. We want to hit our goal, and hit it as soon as possible, so that we can focus on Wikipedia's tenth anniversary (January 15) and on our new project, the Contribution Team.

I'm posting across WikiProjects to engage you, the community, in working to build Wikipedia not only through financial donations, but also through collaboration in building content. You can find more information in Philippe Beaudette's memo to the communities here.

Please visit the Contribution Team page and the Fundraising page to find out how you can help us support and spread free knowledge. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE 13:36, 30 November 2010 (UTC)