Talk:Geographical indications and traditional specialities in the European Union

message: :http://agritrade.cta.int/Geographical%20Indications-8.pdf "Geographical Indications and the challenges for ACP countries", a discussion paper (April 2005)
Can anyone help? —Ian Spackman 10:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 'Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys' is not a name. It's a phrase comprising four words, none of which can be 'protected' in any jurisdiction. Did you not understand how protection works? Are you making an actual point, or just posting juvenile drivel?2A01:4B00:AE0E:6200:F14F:4154:E34F:7F80 (talk) 14:14, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Dead link

message: This seems more on the B side than not but I do have some concerns. Extra opinions are sought. First and foremost is that referencing need some major help. There is a lack of historical context detailing how the concept of a PDO came into account. It also seems like there can be more details on Australia, Canada as well as comment on how this concept is considered outside of the Western World. AgneCheese/Wine 00:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Thoughts on assessment

message: :Kona coffee, the best and the most expensive coffee, from the Kona village on the Big Island island of Hawaii.
I have no idea what this is supposed to mean. Can someone help here please?
The best I can come up with is:
:...such as Kona coffee, the best and the most expensive coffee, from the Kona village on the Big Island island of Hawaii.
-or-
:Kona coffee, the best and the most expensive coffee, is from the Kona village on the Big Island island of Hawaii.
Either way its seems rather POV, not to mention trite. Who says Kona coffee is the best? And why do I, the average reader, care?Awhit003 (talk) 04:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Kona Coffee?

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 . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 09:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: Hmmm... I've been searching for the explanation of the "Protected Geographical Status" category mentioned in the article, but surprisingly found none - it seems that this expression is the generic name encompassing all of the other categories (PDO, PGI, TSG). Shouldn't the main article be moved to "Protected Geographical Status" as the current main title seems to only reflect one of the three possible subcategories of PGS? PeterRet (talk) 15:21, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Protected Geographical Status

message: There are several "see also" links in the middle of the article which are either duplicate or dead. These "see also" references are already covered in the "see also" section at the end of the article. So...  I removed the dead/redundant links in the middle & left in the links in the "see also" section.  Namely, the following two lists seem to have been merged into a single article, 
* removed "See also: List of geographical indications for wine in the European Union" - doesn't exist presently; seems to have been merged into the "List...of spirit drinks..."
* removed "See also: List of geographical designations for spirit drinks in the European Union" - already linked to in the "see also" section; no need to include "see also" links in individual sections
: -- Michael (talk|contrib) 03:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "See also" Links to Lists

message: The article makes it unclear how producers located outside of a qualifying area can legally refer to their products under the law.  If a producer of, for example, Asiago cheese were to be forced to relocate production to an area outside the qualifying geography is there an industry convention for referring to their product after their relocation?  The article appears to make it clear that referring to their product as "Asiago style" or any other sort of "Asiago" reference would be illegal so is there no legal way for the producer to inform their customers that their product is simply Asiago cheese whose production had to be relocated?Zebulin (talk) 18:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: "forced to relocate production to an area outside the qualifying geography...." Then, it's no longer recognised as Asiago cheese under EU rules. The producer can call it whatever he chooses but - here's the kicker, it cannot then be sold as 'Asiago' within the EU.2A01:4B00:AE0E:6200:F14F:4154:E34F:7F80 (talk) 13:56, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification on allowed designation 

message: I gather that TTIP threatens PDO designations, e.g. http://ipkitten.blogspot.de/2015/01/german-agriculture-minister-not-every.html (though that may not be a good source), http://www.rollcall.com/news/should_congress_reconsider_ttip_commentary-237284-1.html , http://www.origin-gi.com/index.php/en/site_content/117-news/6761-16-07-2014-origin-ttip-stakeholder-presentations-events.html , http://www.euractiv.com/sections/trade-society/germans-fret-about-kentucky-fried-bratwurst-under-ttip-311067 .
Does anyone feel up to adding information about this here and/or in the Transatlantic_Trade_and_Investment_Partnership?
PJTraill (talk) 23:14, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I see there is already something under TTIP#National Objections about this, though as of writing “PDO” does not occur in that text, which is why I failed to find it. But a reference here would be worth having. PJTraill (talk) 23:20, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Effect of TTIP 

message: The article shows references pointing nowhere. Maybe there were an older version when it worked, or it was copied without context from an other article. Can somebody resolve these?:
 , , , , ,
 , ,  JSoos (talk) 22:53, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lost references 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Geographical indications and traditional specialities in the European Union. 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/20070926222625/http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodrin/foodname/pfn/index.htm to http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodrin/foodname/pfn/index.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:32, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Title says EU, but other countries have been added, and other countries are doing this kind of protection. Should another article be created for the rest of the world, or should this article move to a more generic title and become a global representation? --valereee (talk) 11:35, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: If the article was re-named to omit "European Union" there would no doubt be criticism that there was an undue focus on Europe. Ideally it should be split to an EU article and one on the general concept, but until anyone volunteers to do the work I think we'll have to live with the current title.Tammbecktalk 13:12, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is the UK still included here at all, following Brexit on 1 January 2021? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: . Because the article is not, in terms of content, exclusively about the EU. On the general point, in my limited understanding, it is the EU that have really worked at setting up these regional and traditional categories. A "worldwide" article would merely reflect the greater interest in this in the EU than elsewhere. If my understanding is wrong, then there should be plenty of material to add to fix any imagined EU bias. Splitting into 2 articles would be a typical Wikipedia failing - forgetting that the reader would be irritated by having to read 2 articles that cover the same subject in different places. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 17:07, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The article opens "Three European Union schemes of ..." So all of the named UK products are still certified under one or more of these schemes, even though UK has left the EU? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not suggesting that the article is well written - clearly the lead needs to reflect the article as it stands. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 18:35, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Notwithstanding article quality, I thought that was a simple question that might lead to a very straightforward edit to the article. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:41, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure the article says UK products are still protected in the EU? The section on United Kingdom sys "All existing EU geographic indications on 31 December 2021 are protected under UK law... " should it also say "All existing EU geographic indications on 31 December 2021 are protected under EU law... "? If so, we need a direct source? And why is that 31 December 2021 and not 31 December 2020? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:47, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, that date was wrong indeed; it should be 31 December 2020. The guidance of the UK indicates it (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/protected-geographical-food-and-drink-names-uk-gi-schemes), and the EU states it quite clearly "The EU and the United Kingdom have also agreed that the stock of existing EU-approved geographical indications (GIs) will be legally protected by the Withdrawal Agreement unless and until a new agreement applying to the stock of geographical indications is concluded in the context of the future relationship. Such geographical indications are existing intellectual property rights in the United Kingdom and the EU today." I will add the link L.tak (talk) 21:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Many thanks for the clarification. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to ? 

message: There is separate page called Protected designation of origin, which is basically a list of Geographic indications. The talk page of that page was redirected to this page. I have recreated the that talk page, and started a discussion on the scope at Talk:Protected designation of origin that may be of relevance. L.tak (talk) 10:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  PDO 

message: In the intro, it is mentioned that "food such as gorgonzola, Parmigiano-Reggiano, feta, the Waterford blaas,[5] Herve cheese, Melton Mowbray pork pies, Piave cheese, Asiago cheese, camembert, Herefordshire cider, cognac, armagnac, and champagne can only be labelled as such if they come from the designated region."
As far as I remember, "Camembert" became a generic word, and only "Camembert de Normandie" (PDO-FR-0112) is protected.
https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eambrosia/geographical-indications-register/details/EUGI00000012895 2A01:CB1D:3C0:A1F7:79E6:7465:BE84:1F1 (talk) 20:28, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Camembert a PDO ?