Wikipedia talk:Notability (breweries)

message: There is the notion that a brewery is already notable. There are plenty of scoopers  like me who have a whole range of publications online and off which list and detail all the breweries in one region (and beyond, such as RateBeer). And - as far as I am aware - no brewery has yet been nominated for deletion. So instead of looking at ways of saying which breweries are notable, we should be looking at which breweries are not going to be notable. A brewery which has been established less than 6 months, for example. Or a brewery which is simply part of a brewpub chain like Rock Bottom. SilkTork 20:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Looking down the telescope

message: Things seem to be fairly settled now and it would appear that there really isn't a consensus.  I think Friday raises a good point of: is this an issue?  If it's not then this is really creating a policy for the sake of itself or prophylactically.  Here's what I propose:
* Let anyone who wants to write a regional article go for it (it would give us a good idea for further discussion)
* Let anyone who wants to write a full article for a given brewery go for it
* Stay the discussion until it becomes an issue
If vanity brewery articles are not a problem (kind of been my assumption here that it was to some degree) then I go back on the fence because I don't have enough information to make a decision.  I like the idea of regional articles but they have their own draw backs (redirects & categories that I raised above).  I like the idea of breweries and beers having their own articles even if they are semi-permanently at a "stub + 2" status (that is its drawback).
If we get to the point where there is edit warring between a regional article and splitting out items for their own articles then I'd be happy to pick up this discussion again.  Comments please! :) Cburnett 04:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Initial consensus summary

message: The nutshell version is absurd. "There is no consensus as to what constitutes a notable brewery..." Why do you need a guideline to say that? -Amarkov blahedits 23:51, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Um... did I miss something? 

message: There's a brewery article up for deletion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhodell Brewery.  This one is probably only significant if we consider all commercial breweries significant.  Feel free to express opinons there.  Friday (talk) 05:09, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: see also Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bagg%C3%A5rdsbryggeriet, which resulted in a deletion.  However the article in question was just a one-lines stub.  It does appear that a significant number of editors would be inclined to just use WP:CORP for breweries, which probably means many smaller ones would be subject to deletion.  Friday (talk) 17:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Practical test of notability 

message: To determine notability of breweries, the WP:CORP applies.  It seems that this project has been discussing alternative guidelines.  Until these are accepted by the community and promoted to guideline status, I suggest that you follow WP:CORP.  Otherwise editors who come to your articles will be deleting them right, left and center for non-notability.  I've tagged this page as an essay, which is what it is.  Jehochman (Talk/Contrib) 01:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is an Essay, WP:CORP is a Guideline 

message: This article has not been updated in years. In fact, for all my work on breweries, I had forgotten that this page exists until I saw it mentioned at an AfD discussion. But, in tandem with other people who write about beer, I have seen the evolution of some more specific standards. Let's see if we can agree what they are and add them to this page. Pinging . Please ping other people as appropriate.
Criteria I use: 
* A brewery can be included on a "List of breweries" type article if it has at least one independent reference. In other words, to be included on a list, it does not have to be notable enough for an article, it just has to be verified by an independent source. That rule was worked out in a discussion (with very limited participation) at Talk:List of breweries in San Diego County, California. 
* A brewery is notable enough to have an article if it meets WP:GNG by having received SIGNIFICANT coverage from independent reliable sources. This does not include directory listings, and IMO it does not include routine "Brewery X just opened in our community" stories in purely local papers. 
* A brewery is also notable enough to have an article if it has received at least one medal from either the Great American Beer Festival or the World Beer Cup. Those are the most prestigious competitions, and winning a medal there really means something. There are hundreds of other competitions, often at state fairs and the like, often called "international" but not really being a major international competition, and they hand out hundreds of medals. IMO those medals do not count toward notability. 
Shall we see if we can agree on a set of specific criteria like this? --MelanieN (talk) 04:38, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: These all seem reasonable, but I'm not entirely convinced that your criteria for article-notability are different enough from WP:ORG that we need a separate criterion. Are we trying to tighten, loosen, or merely clarify the standards there? WP:ORG already disallows counting notability from announcements of openings and closings, or "routine restaurant reviews" (which I interpret to mean the local-newspaper ones that we've been accepting for inclusion on the lists of breweries); it doesn't mention awards, let alone where to draw the line between major or minor ones, but I would assume that the major awards also typically come with some sourcing (if only from the awarding organization) that would go towards the requirement for depth of coverage. I agree that prizes from county fairs are not enough; I'm not sure about state fairs but then again I live in a county with more population than many states so maybe I should think of the smaller states' fairs as being of a similar level. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:14, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the ping. I have remiss on my work on beer related articles lately, so apologies. I would agree with the general approach that  Melanie is taking, but there is a slightly U.S'centric approach in the examples given. This is understandable in the context of the environment which the U.S microbreweries get attention.  David, I think Melanie is trying to tighten and clarify standards from my reading of the above. I think it would be useful to attempt to list the main and most notable national and international brewery awarding bodies, and notable journalists and beer critics, and attempt to use that as a yardstick to aid notability. Initial thoughts. Simon. Irondome (talk) 11:22, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medals