Talk:Armagnac

message: Three regions in Europe? Are we not counting Calvados?
Any suggestion on how to pronounce this?
: We are indeed not counting calvados, which is produced from cider, not from wine.
: The pronounciation of "Calvados" is quite straigtforward. "Armagnac" is pronounced "Armaniac", with a short "i". [aRmaɲak], in International Phonetic Alphabet. Rama 19:17, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion header

message: The article says "Ageing in the barrel removes a part of the alcohol by evaporation .... When the alcohol part reaches 40% or more, the armagnac is kept in large glass bottles"  This seems to imply that aging continues until this is reached, and - but wait - it is going to start at 40% or more! What really happens? Notinasnaid 13:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Puzzling statement 

message: I miss a statement to the bouquetieres or bonificateurs used in the Armagnac production !?! --Symposiarch 10:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bouquetieres 

message: "Along with cognac in Cognac, France and sherry in Jerez, Spain, it is one of only three officially demarcated brandy regions in Europe."
Perhaps I'm missing something, but how is sherry a demarcated brandy region, if sherry is a fortified wine, which I have never known to be a subset of brandy... -Verdatum (talk) 12:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well you do get brandy from Jerez, but that's not quite what the sentence seems to be referring to. I have no idea whether the claim as a whole is true, and this WP page suggests that there are in fact more anyway. I've just taken it out as it seems dubious all round. --Nickhh (talk) 10:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion 

message: The article states 
"In the case of assemblies, the age on the bottle refers to the youngest component. An "XXX" or "VS" armagnac is a mix of several armagnacs of at least two years of ageing in wood. For the VSOP, the ageing is at least five years, and for XO, at least six. Richer and more interesting flavours appear from 15 or 20 years of ageing, or more." 
It then goes on to state 
"Ageing Requirements for armagnac are:
    * VS [Very Special] " XXX "- at least one year old
    * VSOP [Very Superior Old Pale] or Réserve - at least four years old
    * XO, Napoléon, Extra, Vieille Réserve - at least five years old."
I do not see how these two claims are consistent - and I am not competent to decide which, if either, is correct. Any experts?
--Silver149 (talk) 16:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, they're not consistent of course and anyway the second set look more like the (very similar) naming conventions used for Cognac. I've deleted the second part so only the first description is still there. They seem to be the correct designations and ageing stats, but it might be worth double-checking. --Nickhh (talk) 10:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ageing requirements 

message: Would anyone be able to start of list of companies that make/sell Armagnac? There is a similar list in Cognac and I think it'd be useful for people wanting to do *ahem* "further research" in Armagnac. --I (talk) 17:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't these tend to be either very subjective & NPOV if selective (ie the "best" producers), and liable to take up too much space on the page if completist? Plus they can easily end up being magnets for commercial spam. --Nickhh (talk) 10:39, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are both good points and I see their validity but if you have a look at how well it's worked in the Cognac article I think it'll work well in this article too (perhaps use the same format?). In order to address your first point I think there should be no distinction or selectivity - the listing should be either alphabetical or in order of founding, something which is fixed. As to the problem of having too big a list the Armagnac region is limited in size geographically and we could limit the list to those producers that a) have a website, b) have been reviewed in a third party source or c) both of the above/some other *simple* criteria. --I (talk) 16:55, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I've had a look at the Cognac page, but I'm still not convinced tbh. It just seems a bit too commercial and/or listy to my eyes - and don't forget there are 1000s of small producers in Armagnac, so it would be have to be selective in some way, and I'm not sure what criteria it would be best or fairest to use. But I guess if you or anyone else wants to give it a go, it wouldn't be illegal as such of course. --Nickhh (talk) 17:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

text: How about the five/ten largest sellers? That is determinable, and equitable.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.125.251.177 (talk) 01:48, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Producers/Distributors/Retailers 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Armagnac (brandy). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090228161543/http://www.wine-spirit.com:80/articles/55000/Blanche-d'Armagnac-draws-mixed-reactions.aspx?categoryid=276 to http://www.wine-spirit.com/articles/55000/Blanche-d'Armagnac-draws-mixed-reactions.aspx?categoryid=276
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130518031948/http://www.france.fr:80/en/wines-spirits/cognac-and-armagnac to http://www.france.fr/en/wines-spirits/cognac-and-armagnac
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:22, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified