Talk:Muscadet

message: Just a fast note on Brittany/Pays de la Loire discussion. Modern France is split up into larger administrative Regions broken up into smaller administrative departments. Brittany and Pays de la Loire are two currently existing, neighboring regions of this kind. Nantes (and its département, Loire Atlantique) fall within the Pays de la Loire region and not within the current Brittany region. 83.195.92.222 22:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The previous delete of food pairings on the grounds that they are POV is a misguided decision. Food pairings are not purely subjective because it is possible to get them wrong. Muscadet is, for example, a bad choice for pasta in tomato sauce. Furthermore judicious food pairings are probably the most useful information to provide to someone looking for information about an unfamiliar wine. The suggestions provided are classics and marked as such to indicate that others are possible.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.160.162.79 (talk) 21:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I know what the article said. I wrote it. :) But I will point you to one VERY important element of that article. Every single detail in it is WP:CITEd to reliable sources WP:RS and written in an objective, WP:NPOV tone that doesn't included any WP:OR opinion. As I noted above, it is possible to craft a neutral, well referenced section on food and wine pairing of Muscadet. Someone just needs to roll up their sleeves and do it. Reverting back to an unsourced, OR, POV clusterfest is not the Wikipedia way. AgneCheese/Wine 16:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:IAR is intended to build a better encyclopedia not to be a repository for information that only exist within the heads of a few individuals. There is a reason why we have a strong referencing requirement--any information that is relevant to be included in an encyclopedia will be something that there is reliable, independent third party referencing for. AgneCheese/Wine 01:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

text: There are of course some wine and food pairing principles based on the basic physiology of taste and often matching flavours/aromas.   However, going to specific species of fish almost has to be based on tradition. So why not rephrase the section to be more clearly on local/traditional Muscadet and food matchings, with suitable references (which could be in French, if need be), rather than on any general principles of matching Muscadet anywhere? Curiously enough, my perception of Muscadet - with its good acidity and crisp, fresh minerally character - is more as a seafood (oyster) wine rather than fish (especially fish in creamy or buttery sauce) wine. Tomas e (talk) 22:20, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. AgneCheese/Wine 01:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Creation and deletion go hand in hand when you are trying to craft a worthwhile encyclopedic resource. People edit based on the examples that they see and if you have articles filled with poor examples of unsourced, personal opinions then people will adopt those nonconstructive habits. You're right that just because something is in a book, doesn't mean its right. However, typically if it is wrong there is something in a different reliable source that contradicts it. If you have any reliable sources that contradicts anything in the article, feel free to include that. The Nantes thing was mentioned by multiple sources and the fact that it is "out of town" doesn't diminish the effectiveness. As you noticed, the facade of the cathedral is testament. The damage it is taking is damage that is not reaching the vines. I would also say the results of a wine contest doesn't really have much bearings on the evaluation of vineyard situation. The winning wines could be the product of over achieving and talented winemakers. You don't need the most ideally situated vineyard in order to make exceptional wine. Terroir is important but bad winemakers can misuse great terroir while talented winemakers can make the most out of less than great terroir. AgneCheese/Wine 17:29, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Food Pairings

message: Please consult a map showing topographical relief and you'll see that Nantes as a shield is a pretty ridiculous proposition. The appellation covers a vast area and I can't figure how flat little Nantes is going to protect it. On the other hand the hills around the village of Haute Goulaine SE of Nantes may indeed attenuate the coastal influence a bit for some areas. They are the highest point in the appellation. Is that what you're interpreting as a 'Nantes as shield' effect? Whatever the case, westerly winds aren't much of a problem for the low trained vines. It's the cold, clear, still and frosty mornings after budbreak. 
But finally I'm not sure if this is the right place for me. What interests me about the subject are trends that are clearly evident if you have first hand familiarity with the region but which (going by your contributions) are missing from most published English-speaking sources:
*The move away from négociants
*The move away from oak barrels(which was happily a very passing trend)
*The move toward parcel specific bottlings and promoting the expression of terroir
*The move toward producing 'Muscadets de garde' suitable for aging
*The move toward producing weightier, more complex, structured Muscadets suitable for pairing with other foods than fish and shellfish
*No significant move toward producing 'primeur' Muscadet 
  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.160.162.79 (talk) 18:34, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is clear that you are quite passionate about this subject but I wish you would steer that passion towards digging up reliable sources that can be cited in the article. As noted many times, improvements are always welcomed but they should be constructive and sourced. If you would rather not deal with Wikipedia policies and guidelines and just write based on personal experience there are other on-line wine resources such as Encyclowine or Vinismo. AgneCheese/Wine 19:13, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Nantes as a shield

message: Claims that the city of Nantes somehow acts as a windshield for the larger Muscadet appellation or that there is a movement to require oak barrels for sur lie Muscadet are so ridiculously off base that it is impossible to find a counter citation to refute them. So, then, are we stuck with an article that says something embarrassing because of this impossibility of refuting the occasional ludicrous claim backed up by citation that pops up?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.160.162.79 (talk) 22:53, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We're definitely going around in circles here. As I mentioned numerous times, strict referencing is of paramount importance to Wikipedia. If something is truly wrong, there will be some reliable sources out there with the correct information. The hypothetical concept of "truth" does not exist solely within the minds of a few individuals-someone, somewhere has written about it. What you term as "embarrassing" is something that so far has not raised a rancor in the several dozen  book reviews on Soethby's encyclopedia. Again referencing is not something we can compromise. Our science and physics articles face this issue almost daily with folks clamoring against "embarrassing" info but their personal experience and first hand knowledge doesn't cut the mustard for inclusion in an encyclopedia. There is more details about this in our WP:OR policy. Improvements will be gladly welcomed but they must have solid referencing support. If something is truly wrong, there will always be some reliable, verifiable source with the correct info. What lies within a person's head is not verifiable. AgneCheese/Wine 03:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Nantes as a shield ct'd

message: *Claim: Nantes serves as a shield from northwesterly winds for villages lying to the southeast in the Sèvre and Maine appellation.
*Method: Establish via reliable sources that the Sèvre and Maine appellation villages lying to the Southeast are situated higher than Nantes itself.
*Assumption: A lower object does not shield a higher object from wind
*Sources 
** http://www.geonames.org for altitudes
** Wolfram Alpha for distances from Nantes (example query: http://www96.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=distance+from+nantes+to+la+haie+fouassiere)
*Data
***http://www.geonames.org/6434483/nantes.html			0 km	Altitude:  7 m.
***http://www.geonames.org/2969612/vertou.html			9.5 km	Altitude:  23 m. 
***http://www.geonames.org/2980127/saint-fiacre-sur-maine.html	14.4 km	Altitude:  38 m.
***http://www.geonames.org/3008809/la-haie-fouassiere.html		15.6 km Altitude:  27 m.
***http://www.geonames.org/3026195/chateau-thebaud.html		16.7 km	Altitude:  50 m.
***http://www.geonames.org/2996628/maisdon-sur-sevre.html		20.4 km	Altitude:  50 m.
***http://www.geonames.org/6456022/le-pallet.html			21.3 km	Altitude:  30 m.
***http://www.geonames.org/3024578/clisson.html			27.6 km Altitude:  38 m.
*Conclusion:
** Nantes does not shield the villages to its Southeast from Northwesterly wind  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.160.162.79 (talk) 17:45, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You have not provided a reliable source, you have conducted original research, which Wikipedia is not a forum for. Therefore your edits have been reverted. It is high time that you start respected Wikipedia policies. Start by reading them. Tomas e (talk) 18:18, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not cite original research in an article. I struck a detail backed by a citation that nevertheless appears doubtful in light of geographical facts. I have then in the talk page justified my edit by as objective and clearly argued means as I can find. I think that's actually good practice. There are a myriad of print sources possible to cite but the choice of which to include is not an objective decision. Choices about who and what to cite are usually dictated by preference or, most often, by information on hand. As such, the choice of what sources to include certainly does not fall beyond the pale of debate and community process. To claim otherwise goes against the very democratic foundations of Wikipedia. With such a policy you would end up with an incongruous trivi-pedia cobbled together out of sourced and therefore un-deletable material. You have decided to revert the edit and you are probably right to do so since I did not wait for discussion of my arguments here. Let us now discuss the matter. Why do you think we should keep the 'Nantes as windshield hypothesis' notwithstanding the arguments I have made here?79.160.162.79 (talk) 19:23, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it does look like a bit of WP:SYNTHESIS which is prohibited by our WP:NOR policy. However, I do think the edit adding the sourced material about Vertou is appropriate and would work as a compromise. AgneCheese/Wine 04:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Great. My reservations notwithstanding about it needing to take into account important current trends, I think the article has been substantially improved through your contributions195.1.61.80 (talk) 21:22, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Nantes as a shield: reliable refutation

message: In areas where a variety is known under a synonym, it is appropriate to list the regional synonym in the article. Case in point Ugni blanc and Trebbiano. In French wine articles, we would never wiki link Trebbiano and vice versa. Yes it is the name of the wine but just as "Muscadet" is used as a synonym for Melon de Bourgogne, so too is Gros Plant used as a synonym for Folle Blanche. There is abundant reliable sourcing for the use of Gros plant as a synonym for Folle Blanche-Oz Clarke Encyclopedia of Grapes pg 90,  Sotheby pg 201, Jancis Robinson Vines, Grapes and Wines pg 29, The Wine Doctor which uses Gros Plant almost exclusively as a synonym, which is similar to other online sources using it as a syn, etc. AgneCheese/Wine 20:01, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But if you use a local name people won't see that the varietal used to make Gros plant is the same used in Cognac(drink)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.160.162.79 (talk) 20:18, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: They will if they click on the link. That is what redirects and wiki links are for. AgneCheese/Wine 20:35, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Better to use a generic name rather than a local one. But at this point I think it has come down to a childish spat where if I say white you'll say black.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.160.162.79 (talk) 20:41, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry that you feel that way. As an unregistered user, it is impossible to know how long you've been around but judging by your comments and actions I can only assume that they are due to a lack of familiarity in the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia and how items like wikilinking and referencing works. We really can't compromise on things like referencing, it is intimately tied into the very first pillar of the project. Building an encyclopedia is not child's play and we have to be serious about things like referencing. I don't doubt that your heart is in the right place but if you are uncomfortable working within the guidelines and policies of Wikipedia, there are other areas in the web that may give you more enjoyment participating in. AgneCheese/Wine 21:00, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, don't change the subject. Isn't it better to use a common name that you can find in a lot of articles rather than a local one? Wouldn't that be taking referencing seriously?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.160.162.79 (talk) 21:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Previous comment was in regard to your "childish spat". BTW, could you sign your comments with  ~~~~  so that Sinebot doesn't come along and do it? There is some glitch with bots that when they make an edit it messes up with register editor's page watchlist. Anyways, as is the precedent with most wine articles such as the Ugni blanc/Trebbiano example and Syrah/Shiraz, we tend to favor using the local synonyms in context with regional articles. It would be rather inappropriate to insist on referring to Australian "Syrahs" or French "Trebbianos". AgneCheese/Wine 21:19, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For grape varieties known under several synonyms, one "international standard name" obviously has to be chosen in an encyclopedia of international coverage. In Wikipedia, we typically check out authorative sources such as Oxford Companion to Wine or the Vitis International Variety Catalogue. Thus, we list the grape variety used in the Muscadet AOC as Melon de Bourgogne. (There are admittedly a few examples where WP:COMMONNAME has led us to deviate from the prime name as listed by VIVC, such as Zinfandel, which is much more common in the English-speaking world than Primitivo or Crljenak Kaštelanski.) In the case currently discussed, VIVC lists Folle Blanche as a primary name. Actually, Gros Plant is the synonym of no less than six different grape varieties, and Gros Plant followed by something else is the synonym of four additional varieties. However, there is definitely room to create an article Gros Plant du Pays nantais on the western Loire VDQS where Folle Blanche is used (under the synonym Gros Plant). Tomas e (talk) 23:10, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Gros plant as synonym for Folle Blanche

message: I just spotted a couple NY times features on Muscadet that do a good job talking about current trends:
*http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/dining/20060111_TASTING_FEATURE/index.html
*http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/11/dining/11wine.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
I think it would be great to work some of this material into the article because these sources are focused on current trends, a subject that's currently missing  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.1.61.80 (talk) 21:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Good NY times articles on Muscadet

message: Substituted at 00:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment