Talk:Judgment of Paris (wine)

message: The first two sub headings under the "controversies" section make liberal use of the term "scientific."  The first item says "Some critics suggest that wine tastings lack scientific validity"  This seems a strange wording to me.  Are there any people who suggest that taste tests or similar contests are scientific endeavors and that they DO possess scientific validity?    —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.221.152 (talk) 16:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "Scientific"?

message: Not to be confused.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.137.86 (talk) 18:25, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Stag's Leap Wine Cellars v. Stags' Leap Winery

message: I'm a bit confused. I was just double checking some of the facts and I noticed a discrepancy in the red results. The results on page 203 of Judgement of Paris are not consistent with the results in the Appendix of the book, and neither matches the results shown in the article. The difference between the results shown on page 203 and those in the appendix could be explained by one of them including the scores from the hosts, Gallagher and Spurrier. I would correct this article if I knew which set of results were correct. Gregmg 01:13, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: David - the red list currently has 5 and 6 mixed up (e.g. 6 Leoville Las Cases and then 5 Monte Bello) - which is right? I was under the impression that positions 2345 were French (e.g. the ordering is right but the numbers wrong.) But I don't have a reference for that right now and I can see some webpages indeed have 5 Monte Bello, 6 Las Cases. -- Blorg 15:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've corrected the error based on the list provided in Taber's Judgment of Paris, page 203.BMackey 20:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

text: ??? Which references are you referring to? This article only has three external links, and they seem appropriate. Gregmg 01:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red Results 

message: This contest is a joke: the american winners of 1976 refuse to compete today. Pixeltoo 16:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like sour grapes to me. Since the winners of 1976 didn't even know they were competing in 1976, I can't imagine why a refusual would matter today. There have been numerous rematches since '76. Where did you hear that anyone had refused to complete in another such event? Gregmg 20:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To me the biggest joke is that they didn't invite wines from Spain, Italy, Chile or Argentina.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:9201:770D:684C:34F3:92B3:CBCA (talk) 04:32, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: contest is a joke

message: See Talk:Judgment of Paris (disambiguation) for more details. AgneCheese/Wine 20:22, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambig page move 

message: It may be impossible to get free images of the tasting itself, but maybe someone with these vintages could have photos taken of the bottles?  --Kharker 21:01, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bottle photos or labels? 

message: This one seems like a borderline B, leaning towards start, and I would like to get some extra opinions. Here is a listing of my concerns.
:*The lead is very weak and doesn't do a good job summarizing the article per WP:LEAD.
:*There is little discussion on the background and early history of the tasting
:*Very small sections on the Conclusion & Impact on wine that doesn't really give due credit to the scope and signifigance   of the event, particularly for the Californian wine industry and the Globalization of wine. AgneCheese/Wine 23:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To be quite honest, the more I've looked at the article, the more I'm sort of questioning both the "B" part and the "High" part. Regarding the B - it's list-dominated, it's filled with "gossipy" rather nonencyclopedic content (one unnamed taster thought this and another said that - gimme a break!), it's rather US-POV, and it seems to be written on the assumption that "wine" is a kind of competitive sports rather than an agricultural business, a consumer good, something you pair with food... Regarding the "High" - while a notable event, it seems to have been and remain a much more emotional event in the US than in the "outside world", as evidenced by the upcoming film(s). To me, this is more like a Mid/Start article, in comparison to other WP:WINE articles. Tomas e (talk) 23:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ...and a little clarification: with that I mean that I wasn't planning to change the assessment myself (since it is a much less emotional subject to me than it seems to be to some Americans, judging from outside the wikiworld), but that it might perhaps be enlightening to hear how a non-French European (equally used to wines from both the old and the new world, but somewhat inclined to the former) reads this article. Tomas e (talk) 23:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Like I mentioned above, it does seem like it is leaning to start and I would have no problem with it being downgraded. As for the importance, I think High is about right. It is an important event in the history of American (particularly Californian), wine and could be considered of some significance to the broad span of New World wine since it was one of the earliest times that New World wine was considered on par with the historical "great" French wines. In terms of wine history, it is rather on par with the Bordeaux Wine Official Classification of 1855 (similarly rated high) for at least its significance to the American wine industry. AgneCheese/Wine 09:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Thoughts on assessment

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) 06:05, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: we still need numbers for the White results table. Who has these? Binksternet (talk) 15:51, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  White results 

message: where is the judge-by-judge tally of votes for the white wines?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.222.229.206 (talk) 16:33, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  individual votes for white wines? 

message: Holy cow this title is incidiary.  An interesting rematch yes, Rematch of the Century, isn't that a bit over the top?!?
Mikecase00 17:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My apologies. The original page name was just a slogan used by nobody at all (see Mike Case's comment at top of the the page) so I went for the official title. I think The Judgment of Paris 30th Anniversary would probably be best as it draws from the official title and JoP seems to be used a lot by journalists. Nunquam Dormio 19:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah...now I see where it was coming from. I agree that the original title had serious issues. This one just shocked me with its length. I could live with The Judgment of Paris 30th Anniversary. Agne 20:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, despite the popularity of JoP with journalists, the wikipedia page is called Paris_Wine_Tasting_of_1976 and the wikipedia page Judgment of Paris is something else altogether. Paris_Wine_Tasting_of_1976 : 30th Anniversary (or some variation) provides context, removes the possibiity of confusion, and shows that it is directly related to, and is indeed an extension of, the original article. Anyway, just my opinion. All suggestions are better than the original :-) Regards Steve.Moulding 21:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, good point about the original Judgment of Paris article. I honestly think that article should be moved to Judgment of Paris (mythology) with a disambig page for the phrase Judgment of Paris. The big thing that I see here, is that it is quite common for the 1976 tasting to be called the Judgment of Paris and not just by journalist. I think most of my customers and fellow winos who are even aware of the Paris tasting know it more as the Judgment of Paris then the 1976 Paris Tasting. In fact, I've seen and heard countless references to the "famous" 19'75, 1970 and 1986 Paris tastings then I would like to remember. :p. Agne 22:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Works for me. Judgment of Paris (mythology), Judgment of Paris (wine) plus the disambig, and then move this to The Judgment of Paris 30th Anniversary  Regards -- Steve.Moulding 22:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now the million dollar question will be if the editors of the mythology page will go for it. I'll ask to get the ball rolling. Agne 22:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Support: Much of the material here is already in the article about the original tasting. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 17:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I shall go ahead with the redirect in the next week or so. First I will remove material that's already in the main article and then transfer what's left. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 08:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: from the 30th anniversary article, now redirected here

message: Another hoax, thanks to the wine industry business, only the consumer get screwed, not Bordeaux still selling at ridiculous prices some of its worst vintages, and certainly not Napa fermentation industry! Anyway, anyone knowing about wines, knows that public "blind tasting" by experts has no value since they are far from being blind with wines! In addition, for sample, anyone can check that a Haut-Brion it is not a 75% Cabernet! More around 50% Cabernet, 25% Merlot and 25% Cabernet Franc…
Only cheaters would get involved in tastings like this one. Anyone citing something from the "Wine Spectator" is a joke about wine or a professional making money thanks to people credulity and lack of honesty. Dragolight 21:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: HOAX

message: Many people intensely and understandably dislike the results of the Wine Spectator Wine Tasting of 1986 wine competition; you can enjoy the company of a very large group of people. However, you've provided no evidence of either a hoax or a conspiracy. The allegations in "French Bordeaux competition" are not supported by, nor are they consistent with, CellarNotes and other sources of price information. The material in "Vintage charts comparison" is redundant, except that the last sentence lacks support.Hal Birch 02:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hoax allegation

message: It takes up nearly the entire width of the screen-not to mention the POV issues. Can't we think of something better? How about 30th Anniversary of the Judgment of Paris? Agne 04:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My apologies. The original page name was just a slogan used by nobody at all (see Mike Case's comment at top of the the page) so I went for the official title. I think The Judgment of Paris 30th Anniversary would probably be best as it draws from the official title and JoP seems to be used a lot by journalists. Nunquam Dormio 19:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah...now I see where it was coming from. I agree that the original title had serious issues. This one just shocked me with its length. I could live with The Judgment of Paris 30th Anniversary. Agne 20:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, despite the popularity of JoP with journalists, the wikipedia page is called Paris_Wine_Tasting_of_1976 and the wikipedia page Judgment of Paris is something else altogether. Paris_Wine_Tasting_of_1976 : 30th Anniversary (or some variation) provides context, removes the possibiity of confusion, and shows that it is directly related to, and is indeed an extension of, the original article. Anyway, just my opinion. All suggestions are better than the original :-) Regards Steve.Moulding 21:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, good point about the original Judgment of Paris article. I honestly think that article should be moved to Judgment of Paris (mythology) with a disambig page for the phrase Judgment of Paris. The big thing that I see here, is that it is quite common for the 1976 tasting to be called the Judgment of Paris and not just by journalist. I think most of my customers and fellow winos who are even aware of the Paris tasting know it more as the Judgment of Paris then the 1976 Paris Tasting. In fact, I've seen and heard countless references to the "famous" 19'75, 1970 and 1986 Paris tastings then I would like to remember. :p. Agne 22:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Works for me. Judgment of Paris (mythology), Judgment of Paris (wine) plus the disambig, and then move this to The Judgment of Paris 30th Anniversary  Regards -- Steve.Moulding 22:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now the million dollar question will be if the editors of the mythology page will go for it. I'll ask to get the ball rolling. Agne 22:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  OMG....this title! 

message: *Compare to Judgment of Paris (wine). The results are different. Which is correct?? (I suspect not this page). -- Steve.Moulding 17:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1976 results here dont look right 

message: See Talk:Judgment of Paris (disambiguation) for more details. AgneCheese/Wine 21:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambig page created. Discussion about Primary topic 

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) 06:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: I can't really see why this "rematch" should be in a separate article. The only interest and notability of the subject is to see the result in relation to the original tasting, and that's easier to discuss by having all the material in one article. It might also be noted that recently, a couple of articles recording results of individual wine tastings have been put up for AfD and deleted, indicating that the "general" community of editors aren't that happy with a lot of articles recording the results of wine tastings. Tomas e (talk) 10:20, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Support: Much of the material here is already in the article about the original tasting. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 17:11, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I shall go ahead with the redirect in the next week or so. First I will remove material that's already in the main article and then transfer what's left. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 08:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge suggestion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Judgment of Paris (wine). 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/20071018051609/http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may2001/nf2001058_228.htm to http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may2001/nf2001058_228.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930210308/http://www.seattleweekly.com/2002-02-20/news/wine-snob-scandal.php to http://www.seattleweekly.com/2002-02-20/news/wine-snob-scandal.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928231853/http://www.academie-amorim.com/us/laureat_2001/brochet.pdf to http://www.academie-amorim.com/us/laureat_2001/brochet.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2C9171%2C947719%2C00.html
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) 21:15, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The wines, judges, and results sections are completely unreferenced. —howcheng  {chat} 07:25, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  this article needs more references 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Judgment of Paris (wine). 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/20150210165553/http://www.vintnersclub.org/ to http://www.vintnersclub.org/
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) 19:46, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:02, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Hello,
I've noticed that the average score is actually the average score of all tasters (including Gallagher and Spurrier). Given how the article is organized--mentioning that G & S's results are discounted for account of them not being French--I propose that the tables average only the French-based scores. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-H_sz1_gMXwsYp-XucDFADjI55kYEeOLN8xsp7QzvkY/edit?usp=sharing This is a link of my analysis of the tasting. It includes some more levels of analysis not relevant to my comment, but you can see that the average values on the current wiki table correspond to all scores included. My analysis also includes the values of the table that correspond to the non-French being excluded. Email me shermath@umich.edu if any elaboration is needed. I hope to see the table updated with the French-only scores.
Cheers! Shermath (talk) 06:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table Problems