Talk:Laphroaig distillery

message: I added to the article and deleted the bit about the special appointment by HRH the prince of wales. that's the sort of crap they put on just about all scotch bottles and means little. i seriously doubt charles makes too many appointments with the laphroig folks. -R. fiend 01:32, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, Prince Charles has said the Laphroiag 15 is his favorite dram, and he has had special bottlings made for him. —MJBurrage 06:02, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

text: See the Royal Warrant page: only five whisky producers have received the warrant (out of which one has been withdrawn). tsavola 00:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

text: He may well be, but I agree with R Fiend. The British Royal Family doles out these "accreditations" as a means of justifying its existence, and currying favour (freebies often - for such a rich family, they're especially fond of freebies). --MacRusgail (talk) 15:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Appointment by HRH the Prince of Wales

message: On a visit to the distillery in 1998, I was told by the guide that Laphroaig is aged in Jack Daniels casks. I think this deserves a mention, but not sure how to word it myself. Camillus (talk) 12:07, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Aged in Jack Daniels casks

message: In the trivia in mentions that something was reduced from 43% to 40%.  Now I'm pretty sure that's ABV but some clarification would be nice.  --Cuitlahuac 02:15, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it's ABV.  40% is the minimum allowed in the legal definition of scotch whisky (and I changed the article to reflect that; it's a Scottish standard, not a "worldwide" one). FiggyBee 15:39, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ABV? 

message: There has been a recent edit that replaces Only Ardbeg has even stronger peaty taste with this monstrosity: Only Ardbeg is believed to perhaps have a stronger peaty taste.
Strength of flavour is not a POV issue; it's a matte of fact, surely. If not, the fact that it tastes peaty at all must also be classified as POV and we might as well decide to scrap the flavour part of whisky articles. However, since much of the point of reading an article about a given whisky is to read about its flavour, I suggest that we revert this change. Anyone with me on this? -- Strib 23:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding (perhaps derived from the copy on a whisky label, and thus not so reliable) is that peatiness is something that can be measured objectively (e.g., in ppm). —BarrelProof (talk) 19:01, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV? 

message: I removed the bits likening Laphroaig to the flavour of TCP, Chloraseptic, and arson.
TCP and Chloraseptic were removed on the grounds that a) no references were provided for these extreme views, and b) that drinkers familiar with the flavours of TCP and Chloraseptic are unlikely to have any dependable taste buds left. (I have been told but canna confirm that Chloraseptic has a more lingering afterbite.)
Arson was removed on the suspicion that it was inserted by a Cutty Sark drinker who was arson around.
Wanderer57 (talk) 17:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re Edits of Tasting Notes 

message: I see discussion above as to whether this appointment to HRH the Prince of Wales should be mentioned in the article.  It seems some editors disapprove of the Royal appointment system.
Regardless of personal feelings, the facts (as I understand them) are that the appointments are a long-standing practise, that they are publicly documented, that they do carry a certain amount of prestige in traditional circles, that it is untrue that practically every Scotch whisky is "by royal appointment".
Also that an appointment is NOT a device for getting free booze for the castle.  (Although even if I'm naive in believing this and it were shown to be true, that revelation would not disqualify the appointment from being included in the article.  It would actually make a more interesting article, IMHO.)
Accordingly, I think the information does qualify to be included.  Comments?   Wanderer57 (talk) 15:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  By special appointment by HRH 

message: "The 'Johnston' brothers were actually McCabes, of the Clan Donald, who changed their names following the failed Jacobite uprising, and settled on the Isle of Islay."
In the article on the Laphroaig Distillery, it states that the Johnstons were originally McCabes of the Clan Donald. I believe that this is incorrect on two accounts. First of all, McCabes were part of the Clan MacLeod of Lewis, not part of Clan Donald. Secondly, the Johnstons were originally MacIains from Ardnamurchan. The name MacIain means son of John, so logically we get Johnston. For confirmation of this, see <http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/jhb/whisky/smws/laphroa2.html>. For a list of Clan Donald Septs, see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_Donald#Septs_of_Clan_Donald>. For a list of Clan MacLeod of Lewis septs, see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clan_MacLeod#Septs_of_Clan_MacLeod_of_Lewis>
Gaelteach (talk) 20:28, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Alternatively, their own stated history states otherwise. Granted, this could be propaganda and/or marketing, but i'm not sure your assertion overcomes WP:OR; until there's something more substantial, we'll have to maintain their story. Quaeler (talk) 20:45, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Johnstons of Laphroaig Distillery 

message: References for translation -->. --Kansas Bear (talk) 20:57, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  the beautiful hollow by the broad bay 

message: Hi Chris,
I can confirm that I am a direct descendant of the family that founded Laphroaig and have official birth,death & marriage records that confirm my descent.I have also conducted a DNA test that has confirmed that I am not a McCabe but rather a MacDonald.(http://genforum.genealogy.com/johnston/messages/9227.html)
Another family member who can also trace their ancestry to the other side of the Laphroaig family tree has also returned the same DNA test result.
The post on Wikipedia that I edited (and you subsequently reinstated) was sourced to a forum post that the author has since retracted.
I can confirm that I have reinstated my original edit and have also added another source reference.The author of this source is the worlds largest collector of Laphroaig and has published the book 'The Legend of Laphroaig' which supports my claim that my ancestors were not McCabes.This book can be purchased through the Laphroaig website & at the distillery itself.
Laphroaig are well aware of the fact that the Laphroaig Johnstons were not McCabes.At this point their website has not been updated.However I would expect that at some point the distillery will update their own website.
Therefore I feel that I am justified in editing the incorrect information on Wikipedia and have provided sufficient evidence to support my edit.I also feel that it is extremely important to ensure that information on wikipedia is corrected when additonal information becomes available.
Please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss this issue further.
Kind Regards--Cejohnston (talk) 13:27, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I respect that and I understand, however that information will need to be sourced, as the website presently counts as a source. Without it, it would appear to some as WP:OR and/or WP:COI. I am not the most skilled at sourcing, perhaps someone here can help you with that, or we can get an admin to help you. Good luck! --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 13:32, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  McCabe 

message: From the article:
: Until 2005, the venerable standard bearer 10-year-old bottling contained an alcohol percentage of 43%, after which it was changed to the minimal allowable by law percentage of 40%.
I have in front of me a bottle of Laphroaig 10 which is clearly labeled "43% alc./vol."  Said bottle was purchased in late 2010 in California from a fairly high-volume retailer.  It is extremely unlikely it has been sitting in inventory since 2005.  So either the standard bottling has changed back to 43%, or the strength varies by export region.  —Ryan (talk) 21:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  40% vs. 43%