Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wine/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.
Talk archives for Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine (current talk page)
<< 1 < Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 > 8 >>

Contents

Article Importance

  • Why is Rhineland-Palatinate designated as top-importance in the Project?? How are these normally assigned and what does the assignation signify? Perhaps a review is needed. Regards Steve.Moulding 19:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the particular editor who added it felt that it was. However, you are free to downgrade it. I personally would. AgneCheese/Wine 07:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Anybody is me ! and I am still convinced of the top-importance. I have added the mising information on the page Rhineland-Palatinate#Economy; I am guilty of not checking, sorry. I will upgrade the importance again. --Symposiarch 15:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Symposiarch! I certainly don't mean to imply that these are not important. However I do think that there should be some process to reach consensus within the wine project as to what is important. An individual editor placing a top importance label in the wine-project box sort of implies it is of top importance to the project as a whole (which may or may not be true).
If we're going to use importance tags at all (and we dont have to) I would suggest an editor propose an article, explain its importance and ask for reasoned votes as to where it should be on the project-importance scale. BTW, I enjoy your contributions. -- Kind regards Steve.Moulding 17:04, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Steve, I am not interested in collecting votes, I won't assess the WikiProject Wine articles as long as assessments are removed. But I won't stop assess articles created by myself.--Symposiarch 15:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi Symposiarch. Well...your approach is certainly not one I would take myself. I would not go around creating articles and rating them as Top-Importance in any multi-user project, wine or otherwise. Importance is, or should be, what we as Project members think about where an article fits in. I'd again suggest we start with a clean slate and think a bit about importance, rather than have editors assigning importance as they see fit and especially to articles they've created themselves. However, if nobody else has an opinion or if everyone agrees with you that that's the way we want to run the project, that's fine. I do favor reaching a consensus with my fellow project members. Anybody else have an opinion? -- Best regards Steve.Moulding 16:25, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
In my view (I have said more or less the same on another project talk page), to the user of a big encyclopedia, the important article is the article that reader wants to read. Often the "minor" topics are more important because it's less easy to get verifiable information about them elsewhere. Therefore, I'm not generally enthusiastic about highlighting article importance for all to see.
However, there's no denying that for a project it is good to decide which articles most need to be written, maintained and improved -- often the crossroads articles to which a lot of other articles link. A measure of article importance, visible to project members but not too obtrusive, is therefore useful (I think).
Since that is why article importance is useful, it's all the more necessary for it to be determined collaboratively. I don't think it helps anyone if an editor writes an article and then arbitrarily assigns an importance to it. Andrew Dalby 16:49, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the rating as well as the importance level up to (but not including) the designation of "top" should be done arbitrarily an by any individual wine project editor. There is no need to debate and fuss over that. However, per Andrew & Steve, I can see a particular significance for designating an article for "top level importance" and that should be done on collaborative passes. But lets not install something too bureaucratic. How about a nomination on the main project page and if 5 or more wine editors concur, then it gets tagged? I'll create an "example" section there. If no one likes the idea then we'll just junk itAgneCheese/Wine 19:57, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Update The "example section" has been created and I included all the articles that are currently listed as being of Top Level Importance. I figure we can discuss this collaboratively as a project and the articles that achieve the support of 5 or more wine editors will retain the Top Level Importance while the other ones get down graded. The only thing I was not sure of is the "time frame". Obviously we have hit and miss periods of activity among the Wine Project members so we want to have a fair amount of time. Maybe a month? AgneCheese/Wine 20:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I like the idea Agne. But why not just start with a clean slate...clear out the current Top Importance articles now (or push them down one notch) and let them be nominated (as you have done). If they get 5 votes in 1 month they're promoted. If not they remain as is (but can of course be renominated). Obvious candidates should get tagged with top importance fairly quickly. Steve.Moulding 20:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Update In the absence of objections, all Top Importance articles have been demoted to High Importance until voted-in according to the scheme on the main Project page. Some are 'naturals' I expect will be voted back up quickly. If there's a consensus to reinstate the whole set for now I will of course do so. However I think this levels the playing field and now perhaps invites assessment of other wine articles that hadn't previously been rated as top-importance. -- Steve.Moulding 03:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
  • shouldn't we move the successful assessment th the related discussion e.g. Bearbeiten von Talk:Cabernet Sauvignon/Comments ?!?!! (comment by Symposiarch).
 ?? (what is Bearbeiten?) Steve.Moulding 16:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I think all the main grapes should be top level imp (Cab, Chard, Sauv, Merlot, and so on) because they are the main grapes and the ones that are better known. Afterall, the Wine Project is about wine and wine is made from grapes. So, the most imp grapes should have top level classification. There really shouldn't be a process of voting, at least for these. Further things like Wine, Wine tasting should be top level importance also.
ummm...Wine and the main grapes were already proposed and passed, so it's probably a bit late to discuss whether or not we should vote on them. Should we have voted on them?? Well this process was to make importance assignations a little more democratic. While one editor may think something is obviously top-importance, others may not think so. Wine tasting for example...I probably wouldn't vote for it, but others may. If you think it should be top importance, please propose it. -- Regards Steve.Moulding 21:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes...saw you proposed them! :-) -- Steve.Moulding 21:38, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Judgment of Paris and Paris Wine Tasting of 1976

There is currently discussion going on at Talk:Judgement of Paris about moving that page to Judgment of Paris (mythology) and moving the 1976 tasting to Judgment of Paris (wine) with the main Judgment of Paris being a disambig page. Part of the reason is that the wine tasting event is known more as the Judgment of Paris then by the current title and moving the wine page makes sense. Comparing the "What links here" and the relative importance of each topic to their respective field, having a disambig page makes the most sense. Feel free to chim in on whatever your thoughts are. There not a current page move request, just some discussion. AgneCheese/Wine 20:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

An idea: Wine Project Newsletter?

I just had one of those "lightbulb in the shower" moments (<--Missourism, don't worry about it :p) and was wondering what you guys might think of in regards to a Wine Project Newsletter. I'm thinking of something that is a cross between the LGBT Newsletter I get to my talk page and the Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost. It could be delivered to the talk page and include things like "New Members", updates on our sub-projects like article assessment and the Chateau project, maybe a collaboration of the week (or month) and a review of any Wiki-wine related news like the development of WP:WINEGUIDE etc. I will be able expound on it more tomorrow but this was my first thought about it. What do you guys think? AgneCheese/Wine 20:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Definitely! I think it would be useful for everybody. It also might prod some dormant editors into action! Steve.Moulding 20:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Update I've got the home base page for the newsletter started at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/Newsletter as well as the relevant sub pages. Feel free to take a look and poke around. Better still, think about contributing something to the sub pages. I'd like to get out a first edition this Sunday/Monday. AgneCheese/Wine 20:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Capitalisation

It's a bit of a pedantic thing, but as we're working through wine articles, there is a need to get the capitalisation of various types correct. I'm not the expert on this, but most wines are made from cultivars the classic wine grape. Thus, to give it its full glory, Cabernet Sauvignon is Vitis vinifera 'Cabernet Sauvignon', where Cabernet Sauvignon is the name of the cultivar. However, Pinot noir, Pinot gris, Sauvignon blanc are NOT cultivars. Sauvignon and Pinot are cultivars, and the blanc/gris/noir are a descriptor for different expressions of the cultivar. Thus blanc/gris/noir should not be capitalized in those names. I'm not clear if those rules apply to the names in languages other than English (e.g., is it Pinot Grigio or Pinot grigio?), but I think we should slowly attempt to get it right where it's clear. --Limegreen 01:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Wine related barnstar?

Do we have any coders or creative types willing to draft something up? AgneCheese/Wine 03:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd be happy to put something together. I have an idea in mind which I'll have to source, but it shouldn't take too long.--mikaul 10:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
I found this project (last entry on the page) this morning which resulted in the generation of a "Barnstar of Life" for the Personal Life category, which as you probably know includes Food & Drink. As the main thrust of the original proposal on the subject of category barnstars was to minimise the number and diversity of awards of this nature, I wonder what you all think about conforming with this and using the generic Life barnstar for Wine. Of course, it's not as 'winey' as the one I've been working on, but it is quite nice...mikaul 09:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I can live with that one. AgneCheese/Wine 19:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Just curious, what would the winey one look like?
Green barnstar with a red Champagne cap and/or basic corkscrew across; I'd post it just for laughs, but I never finished it :/ --mikaul 00:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I kinda like the idea of having a wine barnstar. Charleenmerced Talk 01:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
  • ok, let me finish it and I'll post it here for consideration --mikaul 14:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Here it is!
  • I like it. I don't like the green color, but that's maybe because I don't like the color green. Wouldn't a glass being poured be better. A graphic here is very cool [1]. Thank you for all your work, I wish I could do stuff like that! --Charleenmerced Talk 14:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
Very cool indeed! The transparency which makes it work would take it out of the realm of the barnstar, I fear, but there's no reason why a glass wouldn't work.--mikaul 22:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Nice work though I would favor a wine glass in the center, this one looks good as well. AgneCheese/Wine 20:01, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! This was the only way I could think of evoking an idea of both still and sparkling wines. A barrel would work in this respect but wouldn't be be as pretty ;) If the consensus is for a wine glass AND we definitely want a wine barnstar, I'll have another go at it. --mikaul 22:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I want a barnstar! Pretty please!? --Charleenmerced Talk 01:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Any new nominee's for the Wine Improvement Drive?

Feel free to add your thoughts to the WID page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/Newsletter/Wine Improvement Drive. Also take a look at our current article Carmenère which is getting close to GA. AgneCheese/Wine 20:31, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Wine Portal and The Wikipedia Wine Society

  • So, is the Wine Portal something we should follow? And have one just like beer does? I created it just in case [[2]] If this is something people may wanna do, I will start making the page and the several parts to add (Did you Know, Featured Article, etc). I thought we could also have a part where the Current Wine Newsletter would be featured, or at least parts of it. Also, I though we could have The Wikipedia Wine Society where we would select a wine weekly, taste it, and encourage an article about the winey or the region. It would be like a Wine Club but in Wikipedia. In it we could reccomend wines and do tasting lessons or wine appreciation lessons. I thought that we could also add our WIne of the week to the Wine Newsletter. Please write your comments in this area so I know whether to go forward with these 2 projects.Charleenmerced Talk 05:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
  • I agree with the Portal, but have serious reservations about the other recommendations. We are here to write an encyclopedia not create a social grouping, so in my opinion tasting and appreciation lessons are out. I even have reservations about the Newsletter. It all seems a bit like Wikipedia:Esperanza which has been killed by the deletion process with only the main article kept for historical reasons. Sorry, I do not think we should go down that road. --Bduke 07:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I thought about the portal but then I figure it would be a lot of work and up keep. :/ Unfortunately, the Wine Project is not as robust and active as would probably be needed to keep a Portal thriving. As for Bduke's concerns, I understand where you are coming from but I am making a concentrated effort to keep the Newsletter driven by the growth and development of our Wiki wine articles. The two areas that could be considered a departure-Wiki Wino's and the tasting notes on the current Wine Improvement Drive-are still anchor down by how they relate to the encyclopedic aspect of building our wine articles. Like with the WID, the wine that we are talking about is related to the article that we are actively improving. Esperanza had more far reaching issues then I think the Newsletter will ever come close to. AgneCheese/Wine 07:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I reserve judgement but will try to be more active in the Project than I have been. --Bduke 10:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
  • A wine portal is needed, IMO, to complement the food portal, among other things. I'm not sure there will ever be a "drink" portal, more likely a small number or slightly more specialised drink-related ones (like Beer). I hear the concerns about work & upkeep, but maybe this would act as a bit of a rallying call for wider participation. FWIW, I could supply all kinds of images for it, just let me know.--mikaul 00:44, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Although it is a lot of work and wine related articles need a lot of work, I also think we need a wine portal. I volunteer to work on it and try to get it started. The only problem is that I don't know that much about coding to make it really good. Charleenmerced Talk 00:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
  • Please go to Portal:Wine and see the great work Scharks has done. --Charleenmerced Talk 14:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Tagging articles for the WikiProject:Wine

  • There are many wine articles out there that are not tagged for the Wine Project. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wine_stubs - these stubs need to be check as to whether they include the wine project tag. They are separated by letter. Please choose one (to remain consistent) and check whether the tag is there.Charleenmerced Talk 15:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
      • Checked A, B, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, N, O, Q, U, X, Y, Z articles Charleenmerced Talk 15:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
      • Done W and all Australian articles and stubs I can find. --Bduke 23:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Done S --mikaul 00:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Notability

  • Igor Ryjenkov Even though I am mostly agaisnt notability restrictions. Can we please discuss as to whether or not this is notable enough?Charleenmerced Talk 15:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
Hmm....I'm inclined to vote yes on the basis of being a Master of Wine. In the Wine World, that is pretty much our equivalent of getting to the "Major leagues" for a sports player since it is the highest level within the profession that one can attain. Same with a Master Sommelier. They are both every bit as notable as some relief pitcher in baseball who pitched 5 games. That's good enough for WP:BIO. AgneCheese/Wine 19:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Needs to be Wikified and/or improved

  • Wine tasting really needs to be improved as well. I added a Wine Tasting process section because I did not see it anywhere, is there a separate article for this? and thus I thought that it should be there. Charleenmerced Talk 20:10, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
  • I'm a bit new to this, but while tagging the 'S' stubs I noticed the article at Silverado Vinyards seems heavily POV/advertising. There are quite a few producers showing up in this way and I feel they should be at least curtailed to basic facts. Opinions? --mikaul 00:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. I found one too at Belgravia vineyard and had a go at fixing it. If you can not fix it, tag it for cleanup or whatever. --Bduke 01:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Yeah, there is definately a lot of that in WIkipedia. I usually tag it with {{advertisement}} and then fix it. It happens with a lot of comapnies...--Charleenmerced Talk 01:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Articles to rate

  • I added tons of info to Wine label and changed it a bit. Please provide an assessment so I know what to improve. Charleenmerced Talk 02:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
    • Re-write for Carmenère finally done. Needs a final copy edit. But, I am finally done! --Charleenmerced Talk 05:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Article's Deletion

  • Bent Creek Winery and Big White House have been tagged for deletion. Please discuss them and support keeping the articles. Charleenmerced Talk 02:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
    • They were deleted! How does one get them back?Charleenmerced Talk 20:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
      • Check the discussion of deletion. Then you can: A- let the page deleted. B- create a new improved article (that accomply the wikipedia policy) (you can make a request to disclose last version in WP:DRV. C- if the discussion was done wrongly or if you have new important fact, you can request undeletion in WP:DRV. Anyway WP:DRV has a better explanation of the procedure. Cate | Talk 12:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Wine Photo needs home

I just LOVE this photo of wine flavored gummies but I can't think of a good article to put it in? My first, tongue in cheek, thought was Wine and food matching but I don't see that going far. Any ideas? AgneCheese/Wine 06:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Funny but... seems inappropriate for any article in the wine category.--Gsherry 07:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Heh...that was the dead end that I hit too. But it is just so darn cute. :) Maybe some day we'll have a Wine in popular culture article that might work. Or I could use it in the newsletter. :p AgneCheese/Wine 19:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, I really like this one though. ◄§ĉҺɑʀκs► 10:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
That is really good one and it has a Wiki-friendly license too. AgneCheese/Wine 19:58, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps for the article you are looking for is Wine gums? Rescendent 13:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox Australian Winery

I have converted "Template:Infobox Winery" to "Template:Infobox Australian Winery" to be be more appropriate for Australia and added a link for it on the main Project page. The template is so far only used on Tahbilk. It probably needs more tweaking to make it even more suitable for Australia. The changes are:

  • Remove linking for location, as many place articles contain the State and some States contain "Australia" to avoid diambiguation with names in UK and other countries, and added State.
  • Replaces "appellation" with "wine region".
  • Added more varieties, as some Australian wineries grow an enormous number of different varieties. Tahbilk, for example, grows 15, so I increased the number from 10 to 15.
  • added "Other attractions", as several wineries have other things to attract the tourist. Several, for example, have prreserved wetlands and allow tourists to tour them.

Please let me know if you have any other suggestions. I'll add it to "Grange" soon. --Bduke 08:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Penfolds with Penfolds Grange of course as its signiture wine now has the new infobox. --Bduke 10:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow. That looks really good. We should think about doing something similar for other wine regions. AgneCheese/Wine 10:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Wine Portal Nominations

Hello all. Please stop by the newly created Portal:Wine (thanks to Userpage:Scharks and provide nominations for the update of the page in the Did you know and Pictures areas and in the others as well. Charleenmerced Talk 21:22, 8 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

    • Just an FYI, I will be changing the wine portal every 2-3 weeks. Basically coinciding with the newsletter. Once we have have more GA articles, I can do it more often. Charleenmerced Talk 02:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Languedoc Wine

We are getting towards the end of the Wine Improvement Drive for Languedoc Wine and any additional help would be appreciated. A big need is an editor's touch-copy edit, grammar fixes and word flow improvement, etc. I consider my niche to be that of a research labrat but I'm certainly lacking in the "brilliant prose" area so, again, any help would be appreciated. Let's get this puppy up to GA! AgneCheese/Wine 18:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

To get some extra input, I put up a Peer review request. Hopefully we can get some new ideas that will help improve the article. AgneCheese/Wine 18:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

New Look Project Page

All I can say is WOW! It looks really nice. Kudos to Scharks! AgneCheese/Wine 18:35, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Double Kudos to Scharks, it looks amazing. Charleenmerced Talk 19:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
  • Agreed, full marks to Scharks :) a vast improvement mikaul 09:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • First time reader, long time drinker. Beautiful. --Saintrain 22:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Project Article Assessment Table

I'm curious is there is a way to include percentage calculations on the article assessment table so that at a glance we could know what percent of our articles at B-class, stub-class etc. I don't think the "importance level" would need percentages but tracking the quality level would be a helpful tool. Do any of our super coders have any ideas? AgneCheese/Wine 18:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

As the article assessment table is automatically updated by a bot, any changes made to it will be overwritten the next time the bot runs. I had a look to see if any other wikiprojects have done something similar to what you requested and the closest I found was here. The tables need to be manually updated so they would be a lot of work. ◄scharks► 12:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Wine Recommendation

I just wanted to reccoment this really good wine that I tried today. It is an 2003 Escudo Rojo from Chile. It is a blend of 4 grapes: Cab. Sauv. Cab Fran, Syrah and Carmenere. It is very for, especially for the price (about $13). Here is what I thought about it.[3](under the Escudo Rojo entry). I just wanted to share this wine with the members of the project because I really liked it. Charleenmerced Talk 02:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Sabrage

I'd like to get some additional wine project opinions on this article. It seems to cross extensively over into the original research realm. The subject matter obviously merits inclusions but it seems like a referenced paragraph that avoids looking like a "How to" in the Champagne (wine) article would suffice. AgneCheese/Wine 03:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

The history section is interesting; "physics" a little unconvincing; the "how to" would be better as a precis of the technique with a link to a pictoral tutorial like this one. Otherwise it's informative but needs at least some refs to give it credibility. mikaul 09:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I also like the pics in that website mikaul posted. Explained it a lot better since I had never heard of this. Charleenmerced Talk 11:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Bollinger Vieilles Vignes Françaises Merger Proposal

Just wanted to get some feedback on merging the Bollinger Vieilles Vignes Françaises article with the Bollinger article. It seems as though the information that is (and could be) contained in the VVF page can be covered just as well by the sub-section on the main Bollinger page. Camw 02:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree, the article also needs some editing for POV language. Charleenmerced Talk 04:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced
  • I also agree. I just tidied up POV language and added some sources.Gsherry 05:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the feedback, the merge has been performed. Camw 04:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

New article

I created a page for Wines of Veneto over the weekend, as it's a very important Italian region and is home to Soave, which I've also expanded a little. I'm looking for photos for these (do I need express permission from people with appropriate licences on Flickr?) and would like to know what you think so far, maybe check facts and add some refs. I've added Soave to wp:wine as an article to expand. mikaul 10:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Article importance and voting

Ok guys, we need to start motivating people to vote for the article importance. It's only about 4-6 of us that ever vote and this way articles that should be top level importance ( Pinot Grigio, Rioja, Shyrah and any other) will never really pass the nomination process. So, to our members, please vote.Charleenmerced Talk 12:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Voting is evil! Seriously, we should not be voting, but discussing towards a consensus. --Bduke 21:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Looking through the examples that have been accepted and those up for debate now, it seems to me that we could have a couple of quidelines for inclusion in the top criteria:

  1. All article on "Wines in country XXXX"
  2. All articles on "Wine/Grape varieties"

These could be automatically put into the top group and left there unless someone challenges it on the talk page. All other nominations should be debated as now. --Bduke 21:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I think the limited number of TOP level importance is about right-especially considering the overall poor quality of our wine articles. Let's work on improving the overall quality of our articles (and the existing TOP level importance) articles and then we can reconsider the importance rating system to get more articles tagged. AgneCheese/Wine 21:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I am with Agne on this one. I think the current process is working well and the articles being selected for top importance are good choices. The only article that I disagree with failing nomination was Wine fault as it is quite obviously a "top" concern in the wine industry. Of the grape varieties selected all are noble grapes and I think for varieties it should stay there. Whilst I can see the advantages in determining which articles should be top level, I feel that time is better spent on improving the articles already passed, and then there is also Operation Stub-Killer! ◄scharks► 08:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

My point was that nomination of articles in these two categories are not being opposed (even if the participants are slow to support them) so we could just remove the !vote process if anyone wants to nominate them. I do not think it will increase the number by much. Most varieties and most countries are already there. --Bduke 22:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I kinda agree with Bduke, there are some articles that should just be top importance automatically. Pinot Grigio, Rioja, Hungarian Wine (of Wines from Hungary) should be Top importance. Afterall, of the top 20 wines in the worls, Hungary keeps getting about half of that list! I also think American Wine, Tempranillo, Zinfandel and maybe Grenache should be in the top importance. Also, Chilean and Argentinian wine should also be top level since they are pretty important wine producers. I think it's not about the current status of the article but about the importance of the article itself. Even if it were a stub, I think everyone would agree that Cabernet Sauv should be top level importance. Well, even as a Start article Pinot Grigio and Rioja should be top as well.Charleenmerced Talk 02:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Gets my vote too. None of the current nominees are at all controversial and should be passed. The voting system remains a useful way of deciding importance of less-than-universally-recognised entries, which are often highly prone to peronal opinion (and personal geographical location!) and I think any further nominations for 'top' importance should be floated by the talk:wp:wine page first, as should any objections to 'high' importance which editors may come across on their travels. mikaul 09:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I do not think voting for importance is the way to go, i think we should have a definition. Voting is evil!
I do agree with most of the nominations though. But will NOT sign for them in a vote! I think the definition should be somethin like this, important grape variety, important regions, general articles of high general importance like wine, wine making. So what grapes and regions are important, lets first define that the one that are not in the {{Wines}} template is not important enough (template can be changed), secondly I would probably have choosen bit more than half of what is in the template but will be a bit generous, when reading the template I find other interesting things, australian wine is not in the template, but barossa is, and austalian wine is choosen as top but not barossa, more strange things, california is TOP and neither california nor Napa Valley (wine) is in the template! More strange things in template, why is Wachau, Amarone and Egri Bikavér is in (ok myabe I missed some very good wine, but I have not even heard of them, wachau does not even have a wine related link in template!!!!) when there is no mention of any german wine or american wine? I would be brave, and change a bit but think that this might be a bit sensitive so I will not do nay changes, lets discuss here. Anyway, for grapes I would keep Chardonnay, Chenin blanc, Gewürztraminer, Pinot gris/Grigio, Riesling, Sauvignon blanc, Sémillon, Cabernet Franc, Cabernet Sauvignon, Grenache, Malbec, Merlot, Pinot noir, Sangiovese, Syrah/Shiraz, Tempranillo and Zinfandel/Primitivo, I can give and take a few. Regions is much more tricky .... Stefan 14:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

New images category

I've created Category:Wine-related images, which I'm hoping to be a collection of Wikipedia's good quality wine related images. If you have any favourite images, or find a great shot on your travels through wine articles, please add the image to this category. We could then choose the Wine Portal selected picture from this category. ◄scharks► 10:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Gee thanks Scharks, this is a lot better than looking for articles one by one (which I so did). On that note, there are so many articles without pictures, please start taking pictures and uploading them. You get to feature your photography works ;-)Charleenmerced Talk 12:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)Charleenmerced

Template:Infobox grape variety

I've also started Template:Infobox grape variety, however I'm not exactly sure what information should be in the infobox. Please provide your suggestions for infobox fields on the Infobox grape variety talk page. ◄scharks► 13:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

List of Spanish wine regions

After probably my most marathon edit to date, I've finally completed a separate list of Spanish wine regions in table format. I'm off now to link to it from the main Spanish wines page (where the old list will need weeding out) but if anyone would care to take a look at the new list and check it over, I'd be grateful. The first thing you will notice is a load of red links... another marathon task waiting to be done. Even the blue ones are mostly non-wine-related links. I'll add them to the pile on the project page. mikaul 15:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)