From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Page history[edit]

This article was a step-by-step instruction to make wine, apparently titled How to make wine. See August 14, 2004 version. The VfD discussion is included for historical purposes:

VfD discussion, August 2004

  • Delete. Do you really think anyone would want to know how to make wine from an encyclopedia? It's not very encyclopedic. If I were an admin, I'd delete this article promptly. The wiki is good enough without this article. Marcus2 23:17, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Move to Wiktionary. RickK 23:45, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)
    • I suppose you mean wikibooks? --Dittaeva 23:54, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
      • Indeed. RickK 00:00, Aug 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • I agree with Rick here move to Wiktionary or move to wiki-books--Plato 23:46, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Should be moved to Wine making and cleaned up or perhaps cleaned up and merged with Wine. The process of wine making is a completely valid encyclopedic entry for Wikipedia.--Dittaeva 23:54, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Redirect to wine making and merge any useful info. Marcus2, this page is in no way a candidate for speedy deletion and so cannot be deleted "promptly" within our policies. Theresa Knott 23:58, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • I just checked, wine making redirects to wine. Suggest the article is moved to cleanup so that it can be rewritten in an encylopedic way. Theresa Knott 00:01, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Maybe your right Theresa and this article needs a cleanup rather than a move--Plato 00:03, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete: Perhaps Clean Up, but, frankly, this isn't anything like a description of how to make wine. There are places on the web that describe home wine making, and it's rather more complicated than this. I suppose we can see what Clean Up would do, but I think we're heading way off mission here. If we have an accurate description, it's a pure Wikibook issue. If we have an inaccurate description, we're doing nothing at all. Wine making ought to describe the industry, how wine is made in oinology. The how-to, though, should be deleted. Geogre 00:26, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete and redirect to wine making. Perhaps a brief overview should be on that article.
  • delete or redirect to wine --Jiang 02:29, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Move to wine making and cleanup. -Sean Curtin 03:07, Aug 22, 2004 (UTC)
  • Move to wine making and cleanup. Wine making deserves its own article and this is a good start. Andrewa 07:03, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Move to wine making and put it on the cleanup list. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:38, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
  • Move to Wine making after the redirect to Wine is removed. I can see having a true How To Make Wine on Wikibooks, to make wine at home, but this seems like a good start for an article on the wine making industry. (There truly seems to be nothing on the Wine page about wine making, other than the fact that it is made from fermented grapes.) --VikÞor 16:41, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The step-by-step instructions were moved to Wikibooks in February 2006, after which the article was replaced by a stub, on March 21, 2006.

Move to wikibooks[edit]

Hmm, given that it was not VfDd in the past, not sure about this. We need an article here, its just not this one. Sure you can have this content on wikibooks if you like. Will try to do a start of a real article sometime. Justinc 23:04, 10 September 2005 (UTC)


Today I rewrote the article from scratch. Han-Kwang 22:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)


I'm going to try and do a little bit of clean up, as well as fix a couple errors over the next day or two. I'll see what I can do about adding a little more information about the process without straying into the how-to and if I get time, a picture or two. The Bethling 18:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

External links[edit]

A persistent anonymous editor insists on adding Winemaking At Home to the external links section. I've removed it three times; another individual has removed it once. There may have been earlier attempts to include this link. I've reviewed the external links guide and have two reasons for removing this link; It doesn't add any value to this article and it is likely link spam. Please discuss here before placing this link back in the article. Gregmg 04:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm removing this:

Although the site doesn't look too spammy, I don't think anonymous editors without any edit history should be adding external links. If other established editors think this is a good resource it can be put back. Han-Kwang 16:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

It's still being added and promoted by IPs without any contribution history so I think you're right about the spam angle. In general I'm not sure why we have How-to pages listed in the section. If there's one really good site that everyone uses it might be appropriate to include, but the list seems to be build up over time into directory of favorite or spammed sites, and they don't really provide encyclopedic information about the subject of winemaking. It might be helpful to come up with some agreement as to what should be linked to here. -- SiobhanHansa 16:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Unless it's a bot, maybe the persistent editor will get tired of trying to add it :).
WriterHound 17:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Merger Discussions[edit]

Below is a list of proposed topics to be merged into this article.

Why this flood of merge proposals? OK for articles that are overlapping or have little potential, but quite a few of the proposed articles don't overlap and do have the potential of being expanded to a detail level not appropriate for Winemaking. Han-Kwang 05:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Some, (Wine production, Winemaker) overlap or cover similar ground, most others (Volatile acidity, Unoaked wine, Pigeage) are little more than wiktionary definitions, unlikely candidates for expansion and meaningless outside of a winemaking context... or not, hence the discussion! There *is* a stub-killing drive underway at WP:WINE which might explain why there's so much activity on these fronts of late. mikaultalk 13:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Wine production[edit]

Is there any reason why Wine production and Winemaking shouldn't be the same article?--HarryHenryGebel 04:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Support: Information should be referenced in Wine production article before merge. That article seems to be written by a single editor. scharks 05:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • support. Although it's the nightmare of an editor to spend a lot of time in an article, only to discover that the article already exists with a different name. Anyway, there are a lot of useful facts in Wine production that would be valuable here. (Disclaimer: I wrote most of this article) Han-Kwang 14:57, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Support The concepts of both articles are essentially the same. No need for two separate articles. --- The Bethling(Talk) 03:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • SupportFlagSteward 11:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Support per resons above ~ mikaultalk 13:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Support The subjects are essentially the same, they need to be in one article. Wine making is the more mature article, and (I think) the more common terminology.-- Siobhan Hansa 13:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Action - I think the merger of Wine Production is approved, it's probably up to LAMM707/Hankwang to do the merger? FlagSteward 22:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Done. Someone else can handle the administrative details of deleting Wine production. Han-Kwang 23:15, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Field blends[edit]

Field blends might be more appropriate in Viticulture?? FlagSteward 02:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

In hindsight, I would agree and a support a merge to Viticulture. AgneCheese/Wine 02:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Support merge to Viticulture. It's not really a part of the wine making process, more a grape growing decision. ---The Bethling(Talk) 03:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Support the viticulture merge ~ mikaultalk 13:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Oppose the viticulture merge. The viticulture article is basically about farming. But field blends are about the make up and balance of the wine. As the articles sit now, field blends fits more into winmakign than into viticulture. No opinion on merging into this article - I don't think it's a bad idea, I'm just wary of how long this article might get with all the additions. -- Siobhan Hansa 13:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Action - merger with Winemaking discontinued, new discussion opened at Talk:Viticulture for a merger there. FlagSteward 22:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


I would oppose both this and the Chaptalization merge. Both of these items have history and encyclopedic content that can be added. AgneCheese/Wine 02:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Oppose a merge to this article. Riddling is really not a general wine making process, it's unique to a specific form of Sparkling wine production. I would support merging it to methode champenoise though. --- The Bethling(Talk) 03:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm sure I've heard of people riddling still sur lie wines, but I guess that the principle of least astonishment would put it in methode champenoise. Having seen that article and the way it already duplicated most of the riddling article, I would support a merger to that article rather than here.FlagSteward 11:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd Support a move to Champagne production - the section there would benefit from the small amount of extra info. mikaultalk 13:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd support a merge to Champagne production - appears to be a better home. Such a small article is probably better merged than left as it is. -- Siobhan Hansa 13:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Action - merger with Winemaking discontinued, new discussion opened at Talk:Champagne_production for a merger there. FlagSteward 22:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


  • Oppose as above with Riddling AgneCheese/Wine 03:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose Chaptalization is a controversial subject whose legality varies depending on the jurisdiction (Legal in France, illegal in Italy. Legal in Oregon, but illegal in California. Only legal for some wine classifications in Germany.) There's a great deal that can be added to the article and can be improved to the point where it can stand on its own. --- The Bethling(Talk) 03:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Support Just because it's banned in certain jurisdictions doesn't mean that it's not a mainstream winemaking technique. The legality shouldn't affect the decision to put it in this article or not. I'm not convinced that there is enough for it to stand on its own - and being a 'joiner' rather than a 'splitter' by instinct, I'd rather see it merged. Then if you're right and there is so much information about chaptalization in this article that it becomes unwieldy, then it can be split out again. If I'm right, then this article is more comprehensive and we've lost a stub.FlagSteward 11:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    It is not just a mainstream winemaking technique, but it's a tremendously important one with a huge amount of history and controversy attached to it. In my opinion one of the most encyclopedic worthy topics in winemaking. I can see that Agne agrees and has already expanded the article well beyond stub status, so I think that the argument is pretty much moot now. --- The Bethling(Talk) 17:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    As an FYI, Bethling is right. :) I'll probably put this article up for GA in the near future. Simply too important and large of a concept to try to shoe horn into this article. AgneCheese/Wine 19:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Support as per FlagSteward. This is the case with all of these merges; if we assume more info "might one day" be added, there would never be any non-overlap merges at all. mikaultalk 13:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I disagree with the idea of not thinking about what an article can expand to. The ideal merger candidate is a stub that can never really expand past a stub. It's far easier to expand an existing stub than pull information about a topic out. Merging topics that can be expanded dissuades editors from adding information that may not be relevent to the topic it was merged into. --- The Bethling(Talk) 17:35, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Support Until the section is expanded, it's better folded into larger article. Oppose after Amatulic's comment I went back and looked again It appears to have been substantially developed today (2007-04-05) by Agne27. I don't have the expertise to evaluate it, but assuming the additions are good it is now too big to be well integrated without losing substantial content. I suggest others who expressed an opinion earlier go back and take another look. -- Siobhan Hansa 13:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The chaptalization article is already detailed enough to stand on its own. This winemaking article should have a brief paragraph on it with a link pointing to the main chaptalization article. -Amatulic 19:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Volatile acidity[edit]

  • Oppose This is a property of the wine itself, and really isn't overly related to the winemaking process. Not sure where it could be merged to. --- The Bethling(Talk) 03:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose Would support a merger into Wine though?FlagSteward 11:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • After thinking it through, I think Wine Fault is the best place for the merge. There's already a section on acetic acid that mentions V.A., I think renaming that section and then merging/redirecting to that section makes sense. --- The Bethling(Talk) 23:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Conditional support I'm not sure this is at all relevant to wine itsef: I'm fairly sure it's a test performed on the must during the winemaking process. If not and it can be shown to be relevant to the finished product, I'd have to withdraw this and oppose any merge to any article, due to it having more than one definitive use. mikaultalk 13:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Volatile Acidity is a measure of specific acids that are present in the wine. Typically it's acetic acid, but there are a couple others than show up. They're all strong tasting and smelling and if present in any sort of non-insignificant concentration ruin a wine. Winemakers will test for it, because it's a major fault. --- The Bethling(Talk) 23:13, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

There's a good article from Wine & Spirit mag that might help people - if the VA article looked like that, then there'd be no need to merge :-) FlagSteward 21:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Merged with Wine fault for now - if someone wants to do something along the lines of that article, they're welcome.... FlagSteward 11:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Unoaked wine[edit]

  • Support Basic winemaking decision. --- The Bethling(Talk) 03:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Support mikaultalk 13:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Support It would be hard to even refer to it in this article without saying more than the standalone article contains. -- Siobhan Hansa 13:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Action - I think the merger of Unoaked wine is approved, if someone wants to do it? FlagSteward 22:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


Action - I think the merger of Pigeage is approved, if someone wants to do it? FlagSteward 22:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


  • Support for the same reason as Wine Production. --- The Bethling(Talk) 03:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • SupportFlagSteward 11:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Support - thinking about it, some of these might link to other topics and I'd suggest they were merged leaving a divert directly to their own (short) section on the Winemaking page. Comments? mikaultalk 13:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Reliance on redirects to sections of an article can be frustrating for readers when the article isn't very stable. Ideally we'd look at all the wikilinks to these terms individually and decide whether to link to winemaking, link to a section within winemaking or delete the link. (But that might be quite a lot of work :)) On the whole I think the actual redirects should go straight to winemaking itself. -- Siobhan Hansa 13:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Action - I think the merger of Winemaker is approved, if someone wants to do it? FlagSteward 22:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I've merged Pigeage, unoaked wine and Winemaker, but I've just chucked the text into this article - I figured it needs a fair bit of copyediting in any case, so a bit more wouldn't hurt - I've got enough on my plate at the moment.... FlagSteward 11:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Attribution note[edit]

Some of the content in the Cold and heat stabilization section is from the merged stub Cold stabilization. AgneCheese/Wine 17:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Thoughts on getting this up to a B[edit]

Well first and foremost, this article most needs some cleaning and structuring. Quite a few stubs were merged into here and left some rough edges. Some other thoughts:

  • Lead could use some expansion per WP:LEAD
  • Referencing. Major need
  • The only major areas missing in terms of comprehensiveness is to touch on some "unique" winemaking styles. Right now the article seems to be singularly focused on your standard red or still wine production. While we have articles on topics like sparkling wine production and carbonic maceration, there should be some summary here as well as touch upon the use of oak, the use of different additives, etc. There should also be some comments on organic winemaking as well as the controversy of fining. AgneCheese/Wine 01:42, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Lab Tests[edit]

I would like to add a section on tests that are performed on the wine once it is in barrels (pH, titra. acidity, vol. acidity, sulfers, alc., etc.). Please let me know if anyone has any suggestions about particular tests to be added. I will be making my contribution in a day or so. Helmin51 (talk) 19:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

What type of reliable sources you have? In particular are there independent third party sources commenting on the significance and repeatability of these test? AgneCheese/Wine 03:36, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
The sources I using are From Vines to Wines by Jeff Cox and Wine by Maynard Amerine and Vernon Singleton. These sources stress the significance of getting Brix, TA and pH at harvest and then to get Brix, TA, pH, resid. sugar, sulfur and alcohol tests prior to bottling. I didn't plan on going too in depth, but just wanted to give a brief overview of these tests and their importance. Helmin51 (talk) 14:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah I think the balance between overview and in depth detailing will be key. While significant and long standing knowledge that is supported by test are certainly okay, I would be weary about putting in "newly discovered" results that haven't been vetted and repeated by other testing since Wikipedia is really not a Journal of Winemaking. My advice would be to go for it and add your material. If anything seems off or a little too indepth, we can always open up a discussion here. AgneCheese/Wine 18:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Additions and edits to this section were done. I might do a little more to ir in the near future. Any suggestions/comments about what has been done? Did I overlook any important lab tests that should be included?Helmin51 (talk) 16:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Good work on the lab tests section. Now it just needs some pictures and links to other articles, and perhaps a copy-edit. I'll try to provide all three, when I get a free moment. As for the "residual sugars" test - that's the same as testing the "specific gravity". Unfortunately, the name of the relevant article is gravity (beer); it is not just beer that has its "gravity" tested. I'll see if I can get that renamed, as well. Fuzzform (talk) 20:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

"Water conditioning"[edit]

Could someone create an article on the topic of water conditioning? I'm not sure where to start. A bunch of the articles concerning winemaking (and probably those about beermaking as well) mention it, so it would make sense to have an article about it. Fuzzform (talk) 20:05, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

External Links[edit]

I'd recommend removing the link to "Jack Keller's Home WInemaking Resources". It's basically an advertising vehicle. However, its remarks regarding different types of yeast used in winemaking are good and if accurate, could be incorporated into the Wiki article. The yeasts are Saccharomyces bayanus, Schizosaccharomyces pombe, Saccharomyces chevalieri, and Saccharomyces beticus.--NinetyNineFennelSeeds (talk) 13:38, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I just looked at History. On Oct 28, 2009 Pamscribd changed the url address of the Jack Keller site. It now links to Previously, there was a link to -- which is a large, informative site. It should be restored.--NinetyNineFennelSeeds (talk) 13:49, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, I reinserted it. It is informative (much more so than the other link), but probably a WP:EL borderline case because of advertisements. Tomas e (talk) 16:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
This bears mentioning: Scribd should not be used for sourcing. It's mostly self-published user-generated content. Anything there that we could consider reliable and verifiable is likely on scribd as a copyright violation, and can be found elsewhere. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Merge discussion: Mutage[edit]

Someone recently created an article on mutage, a winemaking technique used to stop fermentation for producing high-alcohol sweet wines such as port. It's a short article that would fit nicely after the section on malolactic fermentation, so I propose merging it there. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:08, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

I made it. I was looking at Beaumes_de_Venise_AOC#Muscat_de_Beaumes_de_Venise_AOC and then at Glossary_of_winemaking_terms#N and thought we needed something. The following all mention it and are linked to it.
I think it is OK/better as a little stand alone article but I realise it could benefit from more work. Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 07:30, 20 September 2010 (UTC))
Good job, I say.
Right now, the article is short enough to be merged. Additional detail to make a lengthy article seems unlikely. If it happens, we can always split it out to its own article again, using the current text as a summary in this article. But for now, it seems to me that the encyclopedia has greater value if winemaking was expanded instead, rather than having this article stand alone. The existence of links in other articles isn't really an argument against merging. Those links will still work by pointing to Mutage which would redirect here; or the links can easily be changed to point at the proper section in this article. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I agree that mutage should be added to both wine making (but in the 'Crushing and primary fermentation' section just before pressing?) and probably in the Fermentation (wine) page. But do not think it should be merged. I think it is a good stand alone article. Sure it will never be large, but I think it is worthy of its own page. Tried to find some guideline. In WP:MERGE it states Merging should not be considered if: The topics are discrete subjects and deserve their own articles even though they may be short. Not sure what deserve means, but I think mutagen deserve its own article and it for sure is a discrete subject. --Stefan talk 00:27, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I do not like taggs on top of articles, can we please close this? Since I am involved I do not want to close this. Amatulić are you OK to remove the merge tag? Or does anyone else want to close this? If no comments here in a week I will close as no merge and remove the tags (if I remember ... :-) )--Stefan talk 15:24, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 Done - consider the discussion closed. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:45, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Winemaking. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Winemaking/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article needs a lot of work. It is clearly written by wine afficionados who have no technical knowledge. The text is riddled with inaccuracies and half-thuths. It ignores the fact that there are various ways of making wine and wine styles. Over the next couple of months I will attempt to edit the article into something worthwhile. Please bear with me as my spare time is limited. Almenkerk 11:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Last edited at 11:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 10:46, 30 April 2016 (UTC)