Talk:Cask ale

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Beer, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Beer on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.		Beer Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

A great entry, however much of it appears to be the same as http://www.ratebeer.com/Beer-News/Article-352.htm (an article from a couple of years ago) - is this a copyright issue? --Alex Whittaker 00:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. I wrote the RateBeer article. I have adapted it for the Wiki entry. SilkTork 00:29, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

This article seems to be completely lacking in any ability to be objective. I may be wrong, but I was under the impression that an encyclopedia was supposed to enlightne you as to facts, rather than the author's opinion, wherever possible. —This unsigned comment was added by Firenexus (talk • contribs) .

The article was originally written by User:SilkTork for RateBeer, so it has a more informal tone than some of the other beer articles. You are welcome to suggest improvements, or edit it yourself, of course. Be bold! --Dforest 14:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I like this article but it definitely needs major cleanup for tone in order for it to sound like an encyclopedia piece. Right now it's more a how-to for how to enjoy cask beer (which I certainly appreciate). — brighterorange (talk) 04:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Headings

I've adapted a few of the headings in the article, to make them less informal and more suited to an encyclopaedia than a magazine. BrendanH 15:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality

There's a lot of bias in this article- things like In fact, there is no drink more inviting and satisfying than a cask ale in good condition. I'm going to work on rewording some of these, but I'm putting a npov tag on the article also in hopes of getting others to help fix it also. Friday (talk) 16:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the descriptive elements can be retained along the lines of: "cask advocates find that keg beer contains metallic and cardboard notes that are not in cask ale." — goethean ॐ 16:49, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

A bit weasel wordy maybe, but it's definitely better to attribute such statements to "cask advocates" than to present them as fact. (Maybe we can quote someone from CAMRA for some of this?) I like cask ale as much as anybody, but I'm not seeing how cask ale in a metal cask is going to be less metallic than beer in a metal keg. Friday (talk) 16:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

The last section, about the differences between cask and keg ales smacks of elitism. Now, I'm an uninformed American whose entire experience of English beer comes from Newcastle and a few others, but NPOV definitely seems to be an issue here. I'll leave it to someone else who is knowledgeable on the subject to fix it, but it does need fixing, I think. Ghamming 06:25, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

"The most important aspect of cask ale is the mouthfeel. It should not be fizzy. If your beer is fizzy then it’s either a keg beer or it’s a cask ale that’s been put on too soon. If you are used to carbonated drinks - keg beer, bottled beer, sparkling water, cola, etc - the mouthfeel of a cask ale may seem a little strange - even flat or boring - at first. There are some people who don’t even notice the mouthfeel. If they are just drinking the beer without paying attention - may they are chatting away, or maybe they are trying to catch the aroma or flavour of this cask ale they have heard so much about - the mouthfeel will pass them by."

I would challenge "the term 'traditional ingredients' is designed, like the Reinheitsgebot, to prevent artificial preservatives or cheap adjuncts or chemicals from being used". Chemicals such as yeast nutrients or liquor treatments are used by many UK real ale breweries without any concerns from CAMRA as are adjuncts such as maize or roasted barley. So much is fact, my opinion is that the term 'traditional ingredients' is intended as an inclusive term to bring in traditional UK ingredients such as sugar or isinglass (sturgeon's swim bladder). I'm new here, once I'm a bit more sure of the protocol, I'll have a go at editing the page.--David John Edge 13:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, depends what is meant by 'traditional ingredients'. Until the end of the 19th century British Beers were generally brewed with just malt, hops, yeast and water but with the advent of artificial fertilisers, towards the end of the 19th century, many brewers began to experience persistent protein 'hazes' in their beers due to the fact that the new 'super barley' strains, when converted to malt, contained more starch-converting enzymes than previously and protein materials were carrying over into the beer. This could be fixed by adding extra starchy grains to the mash, such as maize and rice, which enabled all the enzymes in the malt to be fully utilised and not 'hang around' after the mashing process. Of course it soon became apparent that this was a way of producing more fermentable sugars, i.e. more beer, using cheaper ingredients. Ever since then, as far as I know, pure malt beers have been in the minority in Britain, Keg, real ale or otherwise. The mashing process can be very tricky which is why many 'brewpubs' in areas where beer is served cold (especially USA and here in Australia) often serve cloudy beer with a 'chill haze' resulting from an 'inaccurate' mash. --MichaelGG 05:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Definately NPOV. I will have a look at trying to objectify this article when I get some free time --Astral (talk) 12:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

NPOV, indeed. It's a CAMRA advocacy piece. Now, given that CAMRA coined the term "real ale", it's entirely reasonable to document their definition, and even their claimed advantages. The sad thing is, fixing it will eviscerate a rather nice essay. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 08:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

This article is too UK biased... what about an international view ? What are pubs... you mean bar, tavern !! ELCouz (talk) 02:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)