Talk:Straw wine

message: ===Support===
* Support the merger of all individual wines at this point - you could also merge Amarone. If individual sections devoted to a particular wine gets too unwieldy, it can be split out again, but they're all stubs at the moment.  Such mergers would also boost the importance of this article to High IMO. FlagSteward 14:22, 5 April 2007 (sUTC)
*Support - like sparkling wine, each of these subject is much better dealt with relative to comparable subjects with v similar styles and production methods. mikaultalk 22:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right that stubs have a purpose and that purpose is to be expanded into something beyond a stub and ideally even beyond a "start". The fundamental question in any merge discussion is whether or not these particular stubs have the potential to become something more then just stubs. If they can not, then the greater service for the Wikipedia reader is to have all these similar themed stubs grouped together to produce the most encyclopedic and comprehensive article on the subject that we can. When dealing with stubs, there is more positive effect in showing a "bigger picture" of the subject (such as "straw wine") versus trying to explain it in piece meal across several different stubs that may only repeat the same thing.AgneCheese/Wine 18:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As for grape articles, I would reckon that there are probably some grape articles that will never be expanded beyond a stub and we have 200+ grape stubs right now. As a long term goal of the wine project, we will probably merge some of those at some point into regional base articles like-Grapes of the Piedmont. But I think that sub-project will be a bit of a way into the future since we do want to give every effort and opportunity to try and expand those stubs. The merging will be an option left for the remaining stubs that no more information can be found for. AgneCheese/Wine 18:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, I think making a call about the potential for this grape or that to be expanded beyond stub is pretty preposterous. It's based upon a subjective value judgement that is based mostly on personal experience with wine. Besides, wikipedia is going to be around for a long long time. It's kinda odd to say that any subject will probably never be expanded. Example, just the other day I expanded two little known grapes significantly (not beyond stub status, but expanded all the same). However, I guess its just the idea of sticking them under straw wine. Grouping lesser-known grapes/varietals by region is of course perfectly reasonable. VanTucky 19:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually it should be based upon the objective nature of available reliable sources on the subject.AgneCheese/Wine 19:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no reliable sources refering to which grapes are more likely to be expanded beyond stub status. What youre doing is taking common knowledge (and reliable published sources) about which are rarer/less popular grapes and then deciding to not let them stand on their own. VanTucky 19:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather I'm saying is that if you can not find any reliable sources with more information on the grape, then you are in a position where that article is not going to be expanded beyond a stub. Hence making it the perfect merge candidate. Typically the horses do come before the cart. You may note that I said the idea of merging the grape articles is a bit off in the future. Things like this take time, especially with 200+ grape stubs. A concept that is of a smaller scope (like straw wine) with only a handful of stubs is easier to tackle and evaluate the available reliable sources in order to make an inform decision. After looking at the sources, I believed that Amarone had potential and hence I opposed it. The others I think would better be served in a merge. AgneCheese/Wine 19:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You just reaffirmed my statement. You're taking source material (or lack thereof) and making a judgement call. But anyway, that's obviously not a crime. I have opposed the merge bc I have been researching material for the Valpolicella and related Veneto regionals. I'm not finished yet but I have added some bits of info and clarified the articles beyond the cursory info included in straw wine at present. VanTucky 19:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, as I said at the start of my arguments objecting to the merge, I think it's all or nothing. Now that the others are in I think it makes sense to complete the merge. But I'd be glad to merge Amarone myself. VanTucky 16:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I'll take the onus on then (Since I still don't think it needs to be merged). Give me till the end of June. If I don't get up to B-class then I'll merge it myself. AgneCheese/Wine 17:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, that's the spirit. What we need on Wikipedia is more onus-taking Wikipedians like yerself mate. June it is. VanTucky 18:41, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't see it as all or nothing at all.  You will always have some wines that only merit a section in a bigger article, and some where there's enough info to justify breaking out into a separate article, with the general article retaining a one-paragraph description and  link to that article.  Already in this article we have a break out to Vin Santo.  Increasing amounts of information can still be incorporated in one place here, if an individual section becomes unwieldy it gets broken out, but otherwise readers benefit from seeing different wines in a unified context. FlagSteward 14:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mergers

message: * Support the merger of all individual wines at this point - you could also merge Amarone. If individual sections devoted to a particular wine gets too unwieldy, it can be split out again, but they're all stubs at the moment.  Such mergers would also boost the importance of this article to High IMO. FlagSteward 14:22, 5 April 2007 (sUTC)
*Support - like sparkling wine, each of these subject is much better dealt with relative to comparable subjects with v similar styles and production methods. mikaultalk 22:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Support

message: * I particularly oppose the merger of Amarone, but generally, I think that any denominated wine is deserving of its own article, with a "see also" to straw wine. Nandesuka 15:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right that stubs have a purpose and that purpose is to be expanded into something beyond a stub and ideally even beyond a "start". The fundamental question in any merge discussion is whether or not these particular stubs have the potential to become something more then just stubs. If they can not, then the greater service for the Wikipedia reader is to have all these similar themed stubs grouped together to produce the most encyclopedic and comprehensive article on the subject that we can. When dealing with stubs, there is more positive effect in showing a "bigger picture" of the subject (such as "straw wine") versus trying to explain it in piece meal across several different stubs that may only repeat the same thing.AgneCheese/Wine 18:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As for grape articles, I would reckon that there are probably some grape articles that will never be expanded beyond a stub and we have 200+ grape stubs right now. As a long term goal of the wine project, we will probably merge some of those at some point into regional base articles like-Grapes of the Piedmont. But I think that sub-project will be a bit of a way into the future since we do want to give every effort and opportunity to try and expand those stubs. The merging will be an option left for the remaining stubs that no more information can be found for. AgneCheese/Wine 18:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, I think making a call about the potential for this grape or that to be expanded beyond stub is pretty preposterous. It's based upon a subjective value judgement that is based mostly on personal experience with wine. Besides, wikipedia is going to be around for a long long time. It's kinda odd to say that any subject will probably never be expanded. Example, just the other day I expanded two little known grapes significantly (not beyond stub status, but expanded all the same). However, I guess its just the idea of sticking them under straw wine. Grouping lesser-known grapes/varietals by region is of course perfectly reasonable. VanTucky 19:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually it should be based upon the objective nature of available reliable sources on the subject.AgneCheese/Wine 19:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no reliable sources refering to which grapes are more likely to be expanded beyond stub status. What youre doing is taking common knowledge (and reliable published sources) about which are rarer/less popular grapes and then deciding to not let them stand on their own. VanTucky 19:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather I'm saying is that if you can not find any reliable sources with more information on the grape, then you are in a position where that article is not going to be expanded beyond a stub. Hence making it the perfect merge candidate. Typically the horses do come before the cart. You may note that I said the idea of merging the grape articles is a bit off in the future. Things like this take time, especially with 200+ grape stubs. A concept that is of a smaller scope (like straw wine) with only a handful of stubs is easier to tackle and evaluate the available reliable sources in order to make an inform decision. After looking at the sources, I believed that Amarone had potential and hence I opposed it. The others I think would better be served in a merge. AgneCheese/Wine 19:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You just reaffirmed my statement. You're taking source material (or lack thereof) and making a judgement call. But anyway, that's obviously not a crime. I have opposed the merge bc I have been researching material for the Valpolicella and related Veneto regionals. I'm not finished yet but I have added some bits of info and clarified the articles beyond the cursory info included in straw wine at present. VanTucky 19:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, as I said at the start of my arguments objecting to the merge, I think it's all or nothing. Now that the others are in I think it makes sense to complete the merge. But I'd be glad to merge Amarone myself. VanTucky 16:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I'll take the onus on then (Since I still don't think it needs to be merged). Give me till the end of June. If I don't get up to B-class then I'll merge it myself. AgneCheese/Wine 17:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, that's the spirit. What we need on Wikipedia is more onus-taking Wikipedians like yerself mate. June it is. VanTucky 18:41, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't see it as all or nothing at all.  You will always have some wines that only merit a section in a bigger article, and some where there's enough info to justify breaking out into a separate article, with the general article retaining a one-paragraph description and  link to that article.  Already in this article we have a break out to Vin Santo.  Increasing amounts of information can still be incorporated in one place here, if an individual section becomes unwieldy it gets broken out, but otherwise readers benefit from seeing different wines in a unified context. FlagSteward 14:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose

message: I've done a major rewrite, which incorporates everything from Amarone, Recioto, Passito and Vin de Paille as they currently exist - it's actually worked quite well IMO. I haven't yet formally merged those last three yet, I thought I might leave it another few days to see if there were any more comments.  I don't know if those opposing the Amarone merge feel differently now that they've seen the new article? In any case, it's become clear that :
* this article should be renamed, as a lot of similar wines don't technically use straw - they might use racks, or hang the grapes up. Raisin wine seems to be the best option, and is fairly widely used, although there is a minor disambiguation problem with a Jewish tradition of using soaked raisins as a substitute for ritual wine.
[[User:FlagSteward[FlagSteward]] 13:55, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Revamp

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  banner as it falls under :Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 05:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: Some of the content of this article comes from the merged Strohwein article. AgneCheese/Wine 06:31, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Attribution note

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Straw wine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120321002442/http://italianmade.com/wine-details/moscato-passito-di-pantelleria-19-459.html to http://italianmade.com/wine-details/moscato-passito-di-pantelleria-19-459.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080513065426/http://www.winesfromaustria.com/data/law1.html to http://www.winesfromaustria.com/data/law1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091124112306/http://www.barboursvillewine.net:80/wine/vineyard-and-wines/wine-at-barboursville/our-wines to http://www.barboursvillewine.net/wine/vineyard-and-wines/wine-at-barboursville/our-wines
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100621064247/http://www.potomacpointwinery.com:80/Wines.aspx to http://www.potomacpointwinery.com/Wines.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:51, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Straw wine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101206100513/http://www.wineofczechrepublic.cz:80/4-1-description-of-wines-in-cr-en.html to http://www.wineofczechrepublic.cz/4-1-description-of-wines-in-cr-en.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110508082735/http://italianmade.com:80/wine-details/recioto-di-soave-5-110.html to http://italianmade.com/wine-details/recioto-di-soave-5-110.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101228103431/https://www.cleverconcepts.net/tablascreek.com/order.php to https://www.cleverconcepts.net/tablascreek.com/order.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:49, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified