Talk:Bordeaux wine regions

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 careful 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) 03:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Pages for individual appellations

It seems that we have not been consistent in deciding whether individual appellations should have their own pages: some do, some don't, some have been merged into this article at some point in the past. The decision as to whether appellations deserve their own page seems to bear no relation to their notability. I imagine that the answer is simply that some appellations happen to have been written up fully, whereas other have been overlooked, and some have been written up as stubs and then merged.

I have written articles for Margaux AOC and Pauillac AOC, both of which I think are clearly notable in their own right.

I propose that:

1. Each appellation should have its own page. This allows for consistency, and prevents us having to decide which appellations are notable (which could get a bit POV). Each cru classé already has its own page, and the appellations are, in general, more notable than the individual châteaux.
2. The page for each appellation should include a complete list of of its cru classés, and also notable unclassed châteaux.
3. Individual châteaux should only be mentioned on this page if they are very famous. At the moment the long lists of châteaux of this page make it unwieldy.
4. This page will include a short summary for each appellation, with a link to its main page.

Havelock Jones (talk) 16:43, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Nice work on the Margaux AOC and Pauillac AOC pages! And, yes, it is nice to have another editor focusing on the major French wine regions. For the most part I would agree with your plan but there are a few areas I would urge caution in.

1. I would be EXTREMELY judicial about including any winery list in region articles. While, yes, there are a lot of notable chateaux in Bordeaux we still must remember that Wikipedia is not a WP:WINEGUIDE. Years of experience have shown that the inclusion of such winery lists usually becomes a spam and POV magnet that are very hard to keep tidy.
2. While major AOCs should, indeed, have their own articles (and, again, great job on starting Margaux and Pauillac), we need to be mindful of the readers when it comes to more minor AOCs (such as Cerons AOC, Côtes de Bordeaux Saint-Macaire AOC, Entre-Deux-Mers-Haut-Benauge AOC, Listrac-Médoc AOC etc) which may not have enough reliable sources available to merit more than a macro-stubs worth of text. In those cases, it is more advantageous to the reader to have the content of these macro-stubs in a regional summary article versus having to click through several different stub pages.

Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:26, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

• When you say that we should be judicious about including individual producers in region articles, what do you mean by 'region articles'? If you mean top level articles like this one, I agree. If you mean articles on individual AOCs, then I think it's clear that if a château is sufficiently notable to merit it's own article, then it's also notable enough to be mentioned in the AOC article. As I see it, the path from the front page to, say, Château Les Carmes Haut-Brion should be something like Arts -> Food -> Wine -> French Wine -> Bordeaux Wine -> Bordeaux Wine Regions -> Pessac-Léognan -> Château Les Carmes Haut Brion. Of course, you might question whether Château Les Carmes Haut Brion really is notable enough to merit its own article, but it is mentioned in two books I have here (both of which cover the entire world), and we do have a start class article on it, citing 6 different sources (none of which are mine, and none of which appear to be excessively close to the subject).
• I don't exactly relish the prospect of writing an article on Entre-Deux-Mers-Haut-Benauge AOC, but I think you might be underestimating the scope of the literature. Amazon comes up with several hundred books on Bordeaux wine, and I have a book here specifically on Château d'Yquem. I'm pretty sure that reliable sources could be found for a reasonable article on Cerons AOC, say. Also, I don't see that it will trouble our readers if we have an overview article, with links to more detailed articles if they want more information. Given the large number of AOCs, we obviously can't say more than a little about each one here.

Havelock Jones (talk) 20:33, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

First Growth and Premier Cru

The article uses both "First Growth" and "Premier Cru". If these mean the same thing then we should standardise on one term. See Cru (wine). Unless there is a recognised English version of "Premier Cru Supérieur" then using the French terms seems best, with the English version in brackets after the first mention.

Also, it would be good to merge the First Growth article into Cru (wine), and set up appropriate redirects. Currently second growth redirects to secondary forest. Verbcatcher (talk) 20:50, 10 November 2013 (UTC)