Talk:Tokaj wine region

message: Juro,
As you suggested, let me make this discussion more scientific. In reply to your comments: "The Slovak region is NOT a separate wine region - unless you are claiming that the Hungarian region "by coincidence" ends exactly at the state border between Slovakia and Hungary. The region was one region throughtout centuries and only became separated in 1918. But of course, you can create two articles. I hope you are not going to argue with the seemingly different Hungarian name"
Actually, the state border is precisely why there are now two different wine regions. Comtemporary wine regions are (at least in the EU) administrative entities, and strictly defined by law. The Hungarian wine region of Tokaj-Hegyalja is strictly defined in geographical terms and does not extend beyond the state border. No one would seriously argue that the northern and southern Zemplen hills are today part of the same county - of course not, an international border splits the historic county into two. The 'international treaty' you have referred to, or rather treaties (I presume you are referring to the separate accession treaties signed by the Slovak and Hungarian governments), in fact define two separate wine regions, so please don't use this as an argument for the opposite. Furthermore, UNESCO's definition of the Tokaj World Heritage Site clearly refers only to the Hungarian wine region (compare with the 'Caves of Aggtelek Karst and Slovak Karst' World Heritage Site which extends across the Slovak-Hungarian border).  
:: There was another treaty between the two countries in 2004. This has nothing to do (directly at least) with the EU accession. 
Besides, the above 'official' explantion of two separate Tokaj wine regions (one in Hungary, one in Slovakia), there are various other arguments for classifying them as separate regions. Each region has its own regulations. In the case of Tokaj-Hegyalja the strict regulations are a legacy from the communist era (many wine makers complain that they are too strict and do not allow for innovation, which is one reason why some are now producing Aszu wines but labelling them as "late harvest" so that they don't have to follow the regulations). These regulations clearly define what can be labelled as Szamorodni, Aszu etc (e.g minimum time maturing in the barrel) and as 3, 4 puttonyos etc. (minimum residual sugar and extract content). The regulations in Slovakia are different and result in wines of a different character, just as an Aszu wine from the Balaton region of Hungary is different to a Tokaji Aszu (though of course the differences are due to other factors too). Another factor which differentiates the two wine regions is that the Tokaj-Hegyalja region has recently received massive foreign investment (approx 50 million Euros) which has enabled the larger wine makers to invest in state-of-the-art facilities. Many of the wines now being produced in the region are significantly different in character, to the wines of ten years ago, let alone the typical wines of the communist era.
::Since the Slovak wines are being produced using the same techniques and cellars and the Hungarians from Hegylja themselves are claiming now that the quality of their wines has decreased because of too many low-quality producers, the question is whether two wines from the Hungarian region from different producers are less different than one Tokaj wine from Slovakia and one wine from Hungary - the answer is, I am quite sure, no. So in this sense it is one single region.The Slovaks are even claiming that they are using the same standards and the same definition of the Tokaj region for decades, while the Hungarian standards have been changed several times and the region is (as the Hungarians have said themselves) constantly moving (if you look at particular vineyards). So, actually, the Slovak wines are closer to the original Tokaj wines than the Hungarian ones (as the Slovaks claim). The argument with the investments is not sufficient, because you could take any region and say that in the western part there are investments, in the eastern there are no investments (provided that its true - I do not know) - that does not change the fact that it is one region. Next, (almost exactly) the Hungarian and Slovak region is even one region in terms of geomorphology  and soil (a separate unit). Next, the whole discussions in 2003-2004 between the (by the way Hungarian-) Slovak minister and the Hungarian minister were led with the aim of accepting the territory as one region and I remember having seen an interview with the Hungarian minister after the treaty has been signed where he said that of course it is one region only separated by a border from 1918. The arguments you and your books are using are simply the result of Hungary's decision from 1958 to start to compete with Czechoslovak producers, which is a typical trade/brand dispute. And the books are a kind of Hungarian marketing accompanying this dispute and trying to persuade the world to buy wine from Hungary and from no other country in the world (which again is nothing new in the world)...But we have two articles now, so this question should be closed for now...Juro 02:18, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are not "Slovak" wines, those are Hungarian wines.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.182.43.216 (talk) 17:32, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: [Untitled]

message: Shouldn't this be at Tokaj-Hegyalja? It is now a redirect, but it's the real name of the region. Tokaj is the town's name only. Alensha 13:57, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Name of the article

message: I agree that the controversion between the Hungarian and Slovakian region is worth mentioning, but definitely not in first place. See Wikipedia:Lead_section.
--Torzsmokus 20:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  pls remove details of the debate from the intro