Jump to content

Talk:Kvass

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 78.88.250.68 (talk) at 09:50, 1 July 2011. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Spelling&misc

It's spelled 'kwass' a few times in the new edition (isn't necessarily wrong, just different). Please fix the inconsistency.

Kvasir reference: Delete maybe? Irrelevant methinks. elpincha 19:42, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Let it sit for a while. Could be etymology. I will check. Mikkalai 19:52, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Kvass is beer?

"is a fermented mildly alcoholic beverage or beer"

Kvass may be mildly alcoholic, but it is definitely not beer. It is not nearly as strong as beer, around 1% and up to 2%, whereas beers are somewhat 4-5% and up to 12% (and more in some cases). But even more important — it's just another drink, it doesn't taste like beer :)--Sascha. 09:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's more like small beer (both in taste and colour), but the manufacturing is different. // Liftarn

Kvass is an ancient beer. The production method dates back thousands of years. SilkTork 18:49, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not beer, not ale, it is kvass. `'Míkka 19:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kvass is not alcoholic otherwise you should consider kefir alchoholic.--Dojarca 20:59, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Summer drink

As a Russian native, I would like to note that kvass is viewed here as a summer drink, and it is on the hottest days of the year that it is peddled on the streets. Almost nobody drinks it in cold winter months. I don't know why a foreigner insists on removing every mention of this fact. --Ghirla-трёп- 21:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's not a fact. Find a citation that says that kvass is only served during the summer. --Stlemur 21:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Who claims that it "is only served during the summer"? Every summer drink may be consumed all year round, if you are up to it. --Ghirla-трёп- 21:42, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There's a story to it, actually. By some strange quirk of bureocracy, in Soviet times factory-made kvass was never bottled. Dunno why. Maybe it was just a way of soft-drink factories to meet planned revenue (it could be easily diluted this way) or whatever, but it was sold only in bulk from those huge wheeled barrels on the streets back then. You couldn't even buy it in a grocery store. And these barrels appeared on the streets only in summer, which was quite logical, as there was very little demand on a street vending of a soft drinks in winter. ;) So the rest is easy: winter => no street vendors => no kvass. And so kvass became established as a summer drink in Soviet Union. Homemade kvass is another story, but it was generally produced by much smaller scale, thus hardly making a point here. --Khathi 15:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it was not "quirk of burocracy". Bottled kvass sucks. But you young guys probably don't remember "real" bread kvass. Anyway, the question is interesting indeed. As far as I remember, I never actually wanted kvass in winter. Kvass is best drunk cold. In winter I'd rather have something hot. `'Míkka 20:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Correction: most brands of bottled kvass suck. We've here got one that doesn't, actually. It has a shelf life of about 3-4 days, though, as it's unpasteurized, unfiltered and doesn't have much in the way of preservatives -- in hot weather it even continues to brew in the bottle. ;) --Khathi 04:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
An exception that only confirms the rule. I was talking history. Microbrewery approach has greater flexibility, but you cannot do this in big industry. `'Míkka 16:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't have anything to do with a microbrewery. It's a pretty massive plant serving a region with about 2M people. So you CAN do it industrially. Their quality isn't very consistent, though. Some batches are noticeably worse than others, while some are better than usually. --Khathi 08:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It also takes longer to brew in the winter. It is mainly a summer drink, though you can now buy bottled stuff year-round, so I do think mention should be made. AllenHansen (talk) 13:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kvass

This article is about "bread kvass". I have no idea the usage in English, but in Russia kvass may be traditionally made from every possible fruit or berry. In my childhood's village the most popular kvasses were from brusnika, golubika, apples and pears, especially from wild ones. Produced without any fermentation starters. I guess, it is cider or prehistoric ale (the latter article is quite poor in its historical part. "Fermented beverage" is even worse: it is simply a redirect to alcoholic beverage, which is plain wrong). `'Míkka 03:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When we talk about wine, we tend to think about grape wine rather than fruit wine. It's the same with kvass. You should write that kvass is not always a bread drink (although the awareness of the fact seems to fade away with time). --Ghirla-трёп- 07:34, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

Should this be merged with the Kombucha article? They are the same drink, just with differing histories which can be related in one article. What do people think? Malick78 (talk) 18:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They're not the same drink at all...kombucha is made with tea, kvass is made with grain --Stlemur (talk) 18:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. Don't know how I missed that. Sorry:) Malick78 (talk) 11:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kvas

I think that should be "kvas" with one "s". Check czech, polish and russian vesion of article. Asab —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.26.251.160 (talk) 21:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Add other links?

I suggest adding these similar world drinks:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barley_water

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mugicha

Nope. This would be simply wrong. Kvass is fermented beverage, while these two are not. --Khathi (talk) 11:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 17:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gira?

Can anybody add some text to explain what gira is and why the "gira" page redirects to this one? Rks13 (talk) 22:32, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gira = kvass in Lithuania. See ausis.gf.vu and food-depot.us and gubernija.lt. --RossF18 (talk) 01:02, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Nikola does NOT mean "not cola"

I think there is wrong understanding of company name Nikola, which produces kvass, as "not cola".Nikola in Russian sounds as male name.It is similar to Nikolas.I think that this word sounds too far for Russian ear to understand it as "not cola". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.73.149.123 (talk) 04:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It does sound a bit too far to be understood as "not Cola" as it is. But producer goes to some length to put the message through, like they unmistakably rhyme Nikola and not Cola ("не кола" ne cola in russian) in their slogan.--Sascha. (talk) 09:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's the first time I've heard about "Никола" == "Не Кола". I'm the Muscovite but this association just never occurred to me. The rhyme is ok, but it's just rhyme - I think you're stretching it that they've deliberately named it after "Ne Cola" and not the Nikola as the Russian male name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.178.199.78 (talk) 15:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the external links, here's why:

Unreliable source, no sources, no oversight, and if it's actually a reliable source, should be integrated as a footnote (WP:ELNO point 1 and 2).
Sally Fallon is a bit of a crank from what I know, but more importantly it's also not a reliable source; there are no references and Ms. Fallon is not a reliable expert such that her word can be taken. And again, were it a reliable source, it could be integrated as a footnote (ELNO 1 and 2 again)
Sort of disagree Fallon is a "crank", unless you take a very broad view of crank, in which case just about anyone in the nutrition field could be called a crank. Also, if an external article has footnotes (or not) doesn't make it a reliable source (or not). The article is actually very good, IMO, and as far as I know there is no reason to think it inaccurate. If you have reason to think the article is crank let me know, I'd be happy to agree with you and if you can show some reasonable doubt on the facts of the article. Green Cardamom (talk) 02:54, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
These are both news stories, reliable for certain uses, but again short and easily integrated. If there's merit to them, integrate as inline citations.
Wikipedia is not a howto manual; should be integrated with wikicookbooks and linked with an interwiki.
And again, short, easily integrated, not an appropriate external link.

None of these links meet with WP:ELYES, as they are all short, easily integrated if worthwhile. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 17:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The English language's foremost writer on the subject of beer, "unreliable." Glad to hear it.

References in Literature

Regarding this section:

In [[Fyodor Dostoevsky]]'s ''[[The Brothers Karamazov]]'', monastery kvass is mentioned in the dinner scene as being famous throughout the neighborhood.<ref>''[[The Brothers Karamazov]]''. [[Fyodor Dostoevsky]]. p. 85. Farrar, Straus and Giroux (June 14, 2002). ISBN 0374528373.</ref> In [[Leo Tolstoy]]'s ''[[The Death of Ivan Ilyich]]'', kvass is made first thing on a holiday morning.<ref>''[[The Death of Ivan Ilyich]]'. [[Leo Tolstoy]]. p. 127 Penguin Classics (May 27, 2008). ISBN 0140449612.</ref> In [[Anton Chekhov]]'s ''[[The Cherry Orchard]]'', kvass is mentioned early in the play, "Bring me some kvass, would you?"<ref>Tom Stoppard (translator), ''The Cherry Orchard'', Grove Press, 2009</ref>. In [[Ivan Goncharov]]'s ''[[Oblomov]]'', and in Tolstoy's ''[[Anna Karenina]]'', kvass is repeatedly mentioned. In [[Sholem Aleichem]]'s ''[[Motl, Peysi the Cantor's Son]]'', diluted kvass is the focus of one of Motl's older brother's get rich quick schemes.

It is important to illustrate Kvass' importance in Russian culture. Also Russian literature is the one place most non-Russian's will be exposed to Kvass. Green Cardamom (talk) 01:51, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:"In popular culture" articles. The main point is that any "cultural" references must match the general concept of "notability" in wikipedia. In this particular case, a particular factoid deserves to be mentioned if
  • it contributes to understanding of article topic (in this case a better solution would be to incorporate it into the main text of the aricle, but in case of underdeveloped articles it is tolerable to keep various facts in kind of "miscellanea" section, until a proper context emerges in the article)
  • It plays a notable role in the work of art/literature, not just mentioned in passing.

Therefore I am leaving only oe item of the above.

As I've seen somewhere some other wikipedian put it, we don't list all books where people eat in the article "spoon". - Altenmann >t 02:12, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately there is no context, all you made is a meaningless list. We are supposed to write prose, not lists, and provide some meaning and context why it is important. I tried to do so, but you deleted it as "original research" - and maybe it was, a little bit (but not all), I had planned to improve some more over the next few days - so I pared it down to the above paragraph just to keep you happy for the short term - and then you deleted the entire thing! You act so quickly and aggressively I dare not even try to work on the article again. This article will continue to languish so long as it is so damn difficult to work on. Green Cardamom (talk) 02:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"leaven" = kvas

Reliable book sources say that the word root of kvass is the Russian word for leaven, or ferment. Yet, this fact was deleted from the article with the comment "leaven" is "zakvaska", not "kvas". I don't speak Russian, but it seems likely that kvass and zakvaska are of the same root. It may not be the literal modern word, but these words seem related and probably of Nordic origin, according to one source. Green Cardamom (talk) 02:34, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, kvas does not mean leaven and never did, period. What you see in "reliable sources" is a dumb copycat from 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, which authors confused the word квас with кваша, which is also not leaven per se, but a "starter": an appropriate substance with added leavening agent so that the fermenting process is already started. For example, when used in bread, it is small amount of flour mixed with warm water and leaven. In other words, lease don't confuse "printed books" with "reliable books". - Altenmann >t 05:28, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As a general advice, please leave subtle etymological issues of foreign language to speakers of the language. A peculiarity of English wikipedia is that it has a wide variety of international community. - Altenmann >t 05:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like you should be able to clear this 100 year long Encyclopedia Britannica confusion up by writing about it on Wikipedia. How about it, native speaker? Here's your chance to set to bed a long misunderstood problem by using the power of Wikipedia. Green Cardamom (talk) 01:36, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Varient names

The below section was deleted with the comment "not a dictionary"

Encyclopedia articles often contain information also contained in dictionaries, there is cross over. Given the limited number of countries which drink kvass (a well defined small list), and the variety of names used, I believe it is important that we incorporate this information into the article. Perhaps as a footnote to the opening bold name. In addition I think it's worth mentioning since there are (or should be) redirects for these name variants, so that readers know which language the redirect is for. Green Cardamom (talk) 02:40, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We don't create redirects from foreign languages. Otherwise we would already have over 900 mln pages rather than meager 9 mln. :-) This is an English wikipedia. In English speech and texts the word gira is not used. - Altenmann >t 05:15, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
True, but we often include non-English versions of words. And there is no limit to the number of redirects, the only limit is if the redirect is correct or not, and if someone believes that is required. It's certainly possible that an English reader will come across gira, perhaps in an English translation of a Lithuania novel in which the translator kept the native word (as is often the case with kvass in English texts), and not knowing what it is, plug it into Wikipedia and see what comes up, in which case a redirect would be essential. Green Cardamom (talk) 01:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mention of commercial Kvass brewers

There has been a very dedicated effort to remove mention of any commercial kvass brewers from the article. I believe this is a mistake. I do agree we need to watch out for commercial intention, but it would also be a disservice to the reader not to mention even a few of the largest or most important kvass brewers in Europe and North America. For example the article on beer would be useless if it didn't mention particular brand names of beer. I suggest we add mention of the largest and/or most important brewers of kvass into the article. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:21, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As long it's cited information, i.e., you have sources for sales numbers and sources naming the largest/most important brewers, that wouldn't be a problem. However, without sales sources and sources naming a brewer the largest or most important brewer, we cannot ourselves make a conclusion about which brand is the largest or most important. Otherwise, no objections. --RossF18 (talk) 04:19, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, all four points I made above (literature, commercial sellers, name variants, name meaning) were really addressed to user:Altenmann since he/she was the one who at various points in the past deleted the content from the article. I would be interested what Altenmann thinks about these four points, but he/she has chosen not to respond (other than to one about literature). Altenmann has edited this article since 2003. I basically disagree with Altenmann's deletions as explained in my posts above, but I don't have the time to get involved like Altenmann has, and don't want to get into edit disputes. Green Cardamom (talk) 04:27, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Chosen not to respond": I responded immediately to what you asked in my talk page. I have real life, you know, I have no time to immediately act on everything what pops up in my 9,000+ long watchlist. Please be more patient when waiting for answers. - Altenmann >t 05:24, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please address each commercial brewer according to its merits. Wikipedia has nothing against businesses. We have not only mentionling, but full-blown articles about them. Wikipedia has two most basic rules for content: notability and verifiability. If you contest some deletion, please provide solid arguments about each separate item deleted, rather than "I disagree". - Altenmann >t 05:24, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Amateur editors have made good faith efforts to include manufacturers in the past, but you deleted it outright with comments like "spam". As a veteran long term editor who has worked on this article for almost 6 years, you should be trying to improve the article, by building on what the amateurs try to include. This article is very incomplete without discussion of commercial brewers of kvass - not that others have tried. A good faith assumption is that the mentioned companies are indeed notable, and all it takes is a quick Google search to find some sources to verify and add a footnote - something only an experienced editor will do. And since you speak Russian, you are in a much better position to do this than anyone else. There might also be information on the Russian Wikipedia. Green Cardamom (talk) 01:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brottrunk-Bread drink

Hello, I think we can add Brottrunk or Bread drink as a similar drink that is produced in Germany. By far not as popular as Kvass and it relatively new to the market, with we compare, and not sold on the streets. Marie-Anne92.225.81.241 (talk) 08:47, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it's not Kvass, why would we include it on the Kvass page, aside from the fact that it's not popular enough for it's own page and you'd like to include it on a page that has nothing to do with it.--RossF18 (talk) 23:46, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alcohol

Kvas is not an aclohol drink in Russia in terms of the law. But if you drink it and drive - it can be your problem. PavelSI (talk) 07:01, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

==

" Polish kwas; meaning "acid" in the 16th century" I don't exacly know how it is in other languages, but in present Polish 'kwas' means acid too ;) 78.88.250.68 (talk) 09:49, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kvass&oldid=437206440"