Talk:Judgment of Paris (wine)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Red Results
I'm a bit confused. I was just double checking some of the facts and I noticed a discrepancy in the red results. The results on page 203 of Judgement of Paris are not consistent with the results in the Appendix of the book, and neither matches the results shown in the article. The difference between the results shown on page 203 and those in the appendix could be explained by one of them including the scores from the hosts, Gallagher and Spurrier. I would correct this article if I knew which set of results were correct. Gregmg 01:13, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi greg-
Congratulations on being so observant! It appears that the results in the Appendix are the correct ones. Montrose and Haut-Brion --Kharker 21:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)are reversed between the two sets of results. However, adding the individual scores for the nine judges for Montrose yields a score of 122 points. This is consistent with the Appendix list.David Justin 17:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
- David - the red list currently has 5 and 6 mixed up (e.g. 6 Leoville Las Cases and then 5 Monte Bello) - which is right? I was under the impression that positions 2345 were French (e.g. the ordering is right but the numbers wrong.) But I don't have a reference for that right now and I can see some webpages indeed have 5 Monte Bello, 6 Las Cases. -- Blorg 15:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
- I've corrected the error based on the list provided in Taber's Judgment of Paris, page 203.BMackey 20:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Many references are Spam, parked domains... Dragolight 01:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
- ??? Which references are you referring to? This article only has three external links, and they seem appropriate. Gregmg 01:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] contest is a joke
This contest is a joke: the american winners of 1976 refuse to compete today. Pixeltoo 16:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds like sour grapes to me. Since the winners of 1976 didn't even know they were competing in 1976, I can't imagine why a refusual would matter today. There have been numerous rematches since '76. Where did you hear that anyone had refused to complete in another such event? Gregmg 20:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Disambig page move
See Talk:Judgment of Paris (disambiguation) for more details. AgneCheese/Wine 20:22, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bottle photos or labels?
It may be impossible to get free images of the tasting itself, but maybe someone with these vintages could have photos taken of the bottles? --Kharker 21:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thoughts on assessment
This one seems like a borderline B, leaning towards start, and I would like to get some extra opinions. Here is a listing of my concerns.
-
- The lead is very weak and doesn't do a good job summarizing the article per WP:LEAD.
- There is little discussion on the background and early history of the tasting
- Very small sections on the Conclusion & Impact on wine that doesn't really give due credit to the scope and signifigance of the event, particularly for the Californian wine industry and the Globalization of wine. AgneCheese/Wine 23:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- To be quite honest, the more I've looked at the article, the more I'm sort of questioning both the "B" part and the "High" part. Regarding the B - it's list-dominated, it's filled with "gossipy" rather nonencyclopedic content (one unnamed taster thought this and another said that - gimme a break!), it's rather US-POV, and it seems to be written on the assumption that "wine" is a kind of competitive sports rather than an agricultural business, a consumer good, something you pair with food... Regarding the "High" - while a notable event, it seems to have been and remain a much more emotional event in the US than in the "outside world", as evidenced by the upcoming film(s). To me, this is more like a Mid/Start article, in comparison to other WP:WINE articles. Tomas e (talk) 23:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- ...and a little clarification: with that I mean that I wasn't planning to change the assessment myself (since it is a much less emotional subject to me than it seems to be to some Americans, judging from outside the wikiworld), but that it might perhaps be enlightening to hear how a non-French European (equally used to wines from both the old and the new world, but somewhat inclined to the former) reads this article. Tomas e (talk) 23:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Like I mentioned above, it does seem like it is leaning to start and I would have no problem with it being downgraded. As for the importance, I think High is about right. It is an important event in the history of American (particularly Californian), wine and could be considered of some significance to the broad span of New World wine since it was one of the earliest times that New World wine was considered on par with the historical "great" French wines. In terms of wine history, it is rather on par with the Bordeaux Wine Official Classification of 1855 (similarly rated high) for at least its significance to the American wine industry. AgneCheese/Wine 09:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
- ...and a little clarification: with that I mean that I wasn't planning to change the assessment myself (since it is a much less emotional subject to me than it seems to be to some Americans, judging from outside the wikiworld), but that it might perhaps be enlightening to hear how a non-French European (equally used to wines from both the old and the new world, but somewhat inclined to the former) reads this article. Tomas e (talk) 23:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)