Talk:Second wine

message: I think sourcing is important, especially since the article is narrow in scope to "second wine" (i.e. the wine made right after the Grand vin) labels and is not meant to list every alternative label made by a Chateau. This article is really not meant to be a WP:WINEGUIDE but rather to note the historical and "special status" of second wines. Once you get into third/fourth label, your mostly dealing with "marketing decision" rather then anything of historical notes. I also think we should limit the list to only the estates that have already had a Wikipedia article created. While I'm sure there are many notable estates that haven't yet had an article created, it makes the list more useful in accordance to WP:LIST to not have any redlinks. AgneCheese/Wine 01:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just listed some without articles, but they'll be WPfeatured fairly soon. MURGH disc. 01:17, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering your track record, I have no doubt. :) AgneCheese/Wine 08:09, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a correct interpretation of WP:LIST. Lists are almost expected to have redlinks. A complete list with redlinks is preferable to one artificially incomplete merely to avoid redlinks. Rmhermen (talk) 14:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the vast majority of list are incomplete in nature. The guidelines of WP:LIST that I was referring to is that the purpose of list is for Information, Navigation and Development along with the caution on the development part that Lists should be optimized for readers over editors and "development red links" should be in user or project space. Or, in this circumstance, probably this talk page. Redlinks are of little use to the readers. AgneCheese/Wine 14:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

text: This is exactly the misinterpretation I am talking about. WP:LIST says nothing like that. It is addressing completely red linked lists and links that should never have articles. The development section of LIST is disussing lists in the form of List of First Growths with no Wikipedia articles which clearly is not encyclopedic content. You should never worry about adding a valid link just because it doesn't currently have an article. Red links are of great use to the readers (they indicate that a thing exists). This is one of the main reasons lists continue to exist in Wikipedia after the introduction of the category system.  (See also Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes Advantages of lists:"Lists can include items for which there are yet no articles (red links).") Rmhermen (talk) 14:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I respect your view and in moderation I can see a benefit, especially with lists like List of Grape Varieties, but I do believe that much more caution needs to be taken in the case of wineries where many do not pass WP:CORP and will never have an article made on them and serve little purpose of inclusion in a list. AgneCheese/Wine 15:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems a straightforward line to draw, that entries are limited to those that pass WP:CORP. MURGH disc. 02:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The list of second wines

message: Obviously we would want to try and get an example of a "second wine" label and a DREAM photo op would be a second wine next to an estate wine but what about other ideas? Maybe pictures of some of the estates? AgneCheese/Wine 03:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Had a go at the DREAM photo (and with some luck this second wine will taste ok). I just substituted the image, but the previous one was quite nice and could probably go back in there somewhere. MURGH disc. 16:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL! I love it. :) Great pic. AgneCheese/Wine 22:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture ideas

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Second 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/20071015080503/http://www.lexpress.fr/mag/saveurs/dossier/vin/dossier.asp?ida=431360 to http://www.lexpress.fr/mag/saveurs/dossier/vin/dossier.asp?ida=431360
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080215185903/http://www.pichon-lalande.com/fr/cep/reserve.asp to http://www.pichon-lalande.com/fr/cep/reserve.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080820095352/http://www.winepros.com.au/jsp/cda/reference/oxford_entry.jsp?entry_id=2119 to http://www.winepros.com.au/jsp/cda/reference/oxford_entry.jsp?entry_id=2119
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071212194917/http://www.cosestournel.com/ to http://www.cosestournel.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071016005539/http://www.mahler-besse.fr/en/mahler_besse_rdp.asp?id=5 to http://www.mahler-besse.fr/en/mahler_besse_rdp.asp?id=5
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080828042646/http://www.saint-emilion-premiers.com/uk/technique_beausejour.html to http://www.saint-emilion-premiers.com/uk/technique_beausejour.html
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130118061615/http://www.belgiumwinewatchers.com/N_wineinfo.asp?id=124 to http://www.belgiumwinewatchers.com/N_wineinfo.asp?id=124
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) 15:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)