Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer/Archive 1

message: Though Wiki currently uses the term "types" to represent the myriad varieties of beer, but the correct term is "styles". Should we take it upon ourselves to correct this oversight, or just leave things as the status quo for now? – ClockworkSoul 15:09, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm for switching over to "styles." --Daniel11 16:14, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: ditto.  The wikiproject for a particular subject gets to set the standard terminology ;). Gentgeen 20:15, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "Beer styles" is poor English and it seems to be incorrect for an article like happoshu which categorically is about a type of beer rather than a "style" of beer. --DannyWilde 00:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you speaking about general usage? Because words often have subtly different meanings in specific fields. --Daniel11 00:11, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

text: 'Style of Beer' is the standard term in my beer encyc. --Buridan 14:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Types" vs "Styles" 

message: I've added a brewbox (btw do you think the brewbox is ready to be listed on the project's front page now?) to the article on Boreale, and I was wondering whether I've linked the styles of beer properly. For instance, should there be a link to American pale ale, for which there's no article as of yet, or should the link be something like American pale ale, since American pale ale is a kind of pale ale? Please let me know if I made any other kind of mistake, too. --Daniel11 10:01, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about styles 

message: It seems that nobody on Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting objects. Normally, we would have waited a week, but considering how many stub articles that we have that need a uniform stubbing, I that it's okay to use now. – ClockworkSoul 15:45, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  <nowiki>{{beer-stub}}</nowiki> 

message: I was thinking that we should probably come up with some kind of notability standard regarding our articles. How large should a brewery be before it gets an article here? I'm thinking any brewery with an annual production of greater than about 15,000 barrels (17,600 hectoliters) is notable enough: that's anything rated above a microbreweries. We probably shouldn't bother to write articles on individual beers at this time, either, and focus mostly on breweries, beer styles, and other major beer-related topics. What do you guys think? – ClockworkSoul 18:56, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't consider myself a very good judge of what's notable, so I won't put forward any original opinion on this. Your suggestion sounds reasonable to me, so you have my support for doing it that way. --Daniel11 22:08, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I reckon that even microbreweries can be notable, as long as their product(s) is/are? Or if they're the oldest surviving brewery in a region, or the only (known) brewer in an area, or the only brewer of a specific style of beer, etc. --Hooloovoo 12:12, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text:  I dont think there should be a strict production level for notability; see my objections to the VfD for Hog's Back Brewery.Justinc 14:52, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: I have been creating more categories like this, as national differences are important in beer generally. It is best to write an article called eg English beer before creating :Category:English beer; some of these articles dont yet have categories. Then I have added :Category:English breweries to file the breweries in, as a subcat of :English beer and the appropriate companies category. Justinc 14:52, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability standards 

message: Anyone have any idea of a good place to find up-to-date information on the annual production of a given brewery?  BeerMe.com has some information, but isn't complete.  --BaronLarf 17:14, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
:For incorporated breweries, they generally have an annual report on their website.  The smaller ones seem to be much less willing to report their production.  In researching Oregon breweries, I used the website of the Oregon Liquor Control Commission, which by law records the amount of barrels sold in Oregon.  That's not quite the same, but it gives a minimum, and lets you make a good estimate. —Sean κ. ⇔ 18:53, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Annual production

message: Hey, about time I posted here.. I was thinking that there should be some sort of flag system where there's a mini flag of the country where the beer/brewery origins, if the brewery is lets say Corona, there would be a mini-Mexican flag, of course there's already the nation listed where its from but a mini flag would be pretty neat IMHO. -Glamour_Boy 
: Here's an example I whipped up.. ignore the (((Caption))) parts, and a logo would go where it says "logo here"
:: We actually threw that idea around a bit. We ended up deciding against it because it would be too much of a pain to standardize in the template, at least at this point. Also, if we were to so it, I think it would make sense to put it in the "location field". Oh, by the way, the production field is for the amount of beer produced. ;) – ClockworkSoul 13:16, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't like the idea of a flag.  I put them onto the aticle List of islands by area and I regret it.  I find it slows the page down.  Also, since beers are licenced to be brewed by others (example Bass (beer) it will be difficult to keep up to date. I bet there is lots of other todo's.Cafe Nervosa | talk 20:07, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationalities 

message: Just added an article on the Bavarian maß.  Maybe add to it if you know more, or link to it in articles related to Bavarian beer traditions? --Sean Kelly 07:13, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Would it be cricket to add that image to the maß article? I mean with it linking to Wikipedia's cafepress store and all. For one I don't mind, but would it be too obvious a fundraising drive? ;) Hooloovoo 13:00, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  We already have the image: it's used on stein. It would be fine to add it. – ClockworkSoul 23:42, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article: Maß 

message: Cafepress sells tons of Wikipedia shirts and various other things, including [www.cafepress.com/wikipedia.20067447 this goodie]. I think I'll buy 2! – ClockworkSoul 12:55, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Would it be cricket to add that image to the maß article? I mean with it linking to Wikipedia's cafepress store and all. For one I don't mind, but would it be too obvious a fundraising drive? ;) Hooloovoo 13:00, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  We already have the image: it's used on stein. It would be fine to add it. – ClockworkSoul 23:42, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  There best maß (stein) ever 

message: Ok, I've recently started to catalgogue/extend articles on beer on the dutch wikipedia, wich is my primary interest, http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorie:Biersoort it might be a source of information for some people here, the most important one's are in a box so don't require extensive knowledge of dutch :), also I'm trying to take pictures of the Belgian beer glassess and beers, so, taking a look on commons under my nick might be interesting. If you're looking for other pictures, http://hekla.rave.org are all my own, leave  me a message wich ones are good and I'll upload them to commons.
: Gueuze10 from your site would be nice, currently expanding gueuze and lambic related stuff. Justinc 12:16, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks for adding that to commons - will use it as soon as I get a chance. It would also be good to do the cross-wiki language links - things like Payottenland, also not sure that Dutch beers are well covered in English Wiki - especially the red beers which are interesting as they appear in Netherlands and US, bot not many other places - just a thought. Justinc 23:03, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beer on the dutch wikipedia 

message: Does anyone think the Heartland Brewery is notable?  It's probably too small, but it is notable in that it's that only microbrewery in New York City (that I've found at least). --Sean κ. ⇔ 18:25, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable? 

message: A (perhaps silly) proposal to you Beeropedians... but how about letting members of this project adopt a specific beer or brewery?
*A Beeropedian can adopt a beer/brewery indefinitely, or for a specific time in which they plan to make a lot of edits.
**An adoption notice on the talk page could focus edits and prevent conflicts that would result in rollbacks
**It would hopefully raise the level of contributions made to individual articles so they may sooner reach Featured Article status.
*To unstub an article someone could adopt an article temporarily to raise the standard enough that removal of the stub notice is warranted.
I'd like to start this notion off by adopting Heineken for the remainder of this week. Yours truly, Hooloovoo 12:54, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the way you're thinking (and I like "Beeropedians", too) but I think that adopting a beer/brewery sounds a bit like "claiming" an article, especially because to unstub any article you shouldn't need to claim it. Perhaps for the same effect, while also encouraging others to help out, we could have one or more beer article(s) of the week that we can choose to focus on. What do you think? – ClockworkSoul 13:03, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: I dont think you need an adoption notice. The way I work is to make edits quite small so that conflicts rarely happen, just add a few paragraphs or sentences at a time. It would be nice to get a reasonable number of articles up to good quality as soon as possible though. Justinc 13:10, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't go so far as to actually lay claim to an article, that would be a very unwiki thing to do. I was thinking more like a  notice on the talk page: Beeropedian Hooloovoo has for the moment adopted this article, you should see marked improvements to it shortly. In order to avoid edit conflicts please consult the page history, if no edits have been made in the last hour Hooloovoo probably forgot about editing due to a beer induced stupor. If you see recent activity while this notice is in place, he would appreciate it if you left a note on his talk page.. This would be a way to tell people to expect rapid-fire changes to the article, and any edits they make to it that get overwritten by a Beeropedian shouldn't be taken as an edit war... I do like the Beer/Brewery of the week idea a lot as well, this would also drive rapid improvement... and we can always between us state our preference for a specific page, which is what I intended adoption to mean; a way to focus edits and avoid conflicts within this project. Like Justin most my edits are small and quick though, so maybe the notice is indeed overkill. --Hooloovoo 13:15, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  We already have the  template to prevent edit conflicts. – ClockworkSoul 13:19, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Most excellent, I forgot about that one. Any suggestions for beers of the week? For my part I'll focus on Heineken, it's in dire need of improvement, imo. --Hooloovoo 13:25, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text:  Heres a suggestion: beer. It was a featured articles, but was delisted about a month ago because it was editing into mediocrity. I would like to get that back to FAS as soon as possible. – ClockworkSoul 13:27, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Speaking of the beer article, "Ingredients" should probably be split up into a much shorter "Ingredients" section and a "Brewing process" section.  Just had the thought and needed to jot it down. --Sean κ. ⇔ 15:55, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adopt a beer/brewery 

message: A proper section, just so we know where we're all going with the cleanup on the main article. We want to get it back to Featured Article Status asap. You can leave your thoughts on each individual section here as a todo list of sorts.
* I decided to be really radical. I have removed everything that is dups of other articles, spam etc. I know its a bit radical. But feel free to put anything back that you think makes this a better article. I havent actually deleted anything that is somewhere else as far as I know. Justinc 16:31, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, don't have a picture like that... wish I had, sounds like a brilliant idea :) Would it have to be 1 picture of all those glasses lined up, or can it be a Photoshopped composite? Because the latter is something I can probably deliver within a day. A raytraced version is possible as well, with more time. Hooloovoo 18:46, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How about this one? [A Looooot of Steins Hooloovoo 19:02, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Some more from the same source WP's PD images resource page says these are (you guessed it) PD.
===Ingredients===
It has been suggested that the ingredients section is cleaned up, perhaps splitting off the process into its own article, I second this --Hooloovoo 17:41, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Done, and trimmed.  Feel free to put stuff back. --Sean κ. ⇔ 18:01, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: Infobox for a style of beer
Bitter                                                                  	Bitter
                                                                        	
Country of Origin                                                       	England
Original Gravity                                                        	1040-1050
Final Gravity                                                           	1015-1028
Bitterness IBU                                                          	30-50
Color (SRM)                                                             	8 (Pale Brown)
Attenuation                                                             	60-70
Yeast type                                                              	Ale
Malt percentage                                                         	90-100
ABV                                                                     	3.5 - 4.5%
Serving Temperature                                                     	50-60°F
BJCP style #                                                            	8B
This article forms part of a series on beers and breweries of the world.	This article forms part of a series on beers and breweries of the world.
Just messing around with brewboxes, I'm working on standardizing the beer styles articles, and though something like this might help.  The numbers are not accurate for Bitter, but should give an idea of what it can look like. Allegrorondo
More messing around, I added 'serving temperature', as this is something that can vary widely by beer style, and can really affect flavor.Allegrorondo
===Related drinks, ordered by region===
I've added the ordered by region suffix and cleaned up the list today. --Hooloovoo 17:41, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: I got occupied writing a Wikinews article after watching Star Trek ;) So... since n:KLM flight to Mexico sent back by U.S. Homeland Security, inquiry follows is now ready and published, I'll take on the overhaul of the Beer article with the improvements listed by us thusfar (which involves a lot of deleting, lol). --Hooloovoo 14:14, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Beer]] article cleanup, discussion and notes. 

message: It has been suggested that the ingredients section is cleaned up, perhaps splitting off the process into its own article, I second this --Hooloovoo 17:41, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, and trimmed.  Feel free to put stuff back. --Sean κ. ⇔ 18:01, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ingredients

message: Just added. --Sean κ. ⇔ 18:01, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The brewing process

message: I've added the ordered by region suffix and cleaned up the list today. --Hooloovoo 17:41, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Related drinks, ordered by region

message: This needs a cleanup, perhaps ordering by production or sales?  --Hooloovoo 17:41, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Brewing industry

message: I'll be consolidating this with the Brewery Industry section (after I'm done watching Star Trek). The Brewing industry article itself is in need of updating as well, I'll take that on after this refactoring. I believe it's best to just have a few sparse links to larger pages such as Beer and nationality, and the updated Industry article. Ideas? Hooloovoo 18:47, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I got occupied writing a Wikinews article after watching Star Trek ;) So... since n:KLM flight to Mexico sent back by U.S. Homeland Security, inquiry follows is now ready and published, I'll take on the overhaul of the Beer article with the improvements listed by us thusfar (which involves a lot of deleting, lol). --Hooloovoo 14:14, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Commercial brands of beer

message: Offer a short description of these topics, like done at the Related drinks section?  --Hooloovoo 17:41, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: See also

message: Weed out spam and order, maybe even creating sublevels. --Hooloovoo 17:41, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: External links

message: I've run into a problem when categorizing beers... I guess I should just say the example.  Henry Weinhard's is a beer that's been around in the Northwest (US) for 150 years.  As with most beers, the company and brewery were eventually bought, three times in fact.  The last company that owned the brewery decided to sell it and the brand to Miller, who shut down the brewery.  Today, Miller owns the brand of five beers brewed under the Weinhard name.  However, it only actually brews two of the beers, and contracts the other three out to Full Sail, a small brewery in Oregon.  So I guess the question is, whose beer is it?  If you go to SABMiller's website, they claim it's their beer, and the Full Sail website doesn't list it.  Yet it seems like it should be on the Full Sail page.
This issue seems to be popping up a lot: some corporation owns the brand, but another local brewery makes the beer.  Whose page should get the mention?  Both?
On a related note, I've been abusing the brewbox a bit.  For example, on InBev, I've listed Beck's and Labatt as subsidiaries where the beer names should go.  Comments? --Sean κ. ⇔ 03:31, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who owns a beer? 

message: When we talk about volume for breweries, can we use millions or thousands of hectolitres, instead of gallons or barrels?  This seems to be the most common unit among them.  For US breweries, I've been doing things like, "Output: 200,000 US barrels (0.33 million hectolitres)".
:Please do use hectolitres, indeed. It's an SI derived unit, for one, and secondly gallons make me want to start up Josh Madison's Convert... which in and on itself is an excellent little program, but a waste of time to need to use when reading an encyclopaedia :P Hooloovoo 19:05, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Barrels is a very common unit, and is traditionally used over hectoliters. However, as a scientist, I like SI units. Perhaps using both would not be entirely inappropriate? – ClockworkSoul 19:58, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Units 

message: Can any Danish speakers figure out if Hancock brewery is large enough to be notable? --Sean κ. ⇔ 22:48, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll ask a few of my Danish colleague coders next I speak to them on Skype or MSN, which should be within the next few days. (I know just a couple of Danish words, including that for beer: Öl. Apart from that it's mostly limited to curses ;)) Hooloovoo 23:07, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Danish 

message: Should we have a separate subcategory for defunct breweries like Hendon Brewery?
* No, I don't think so...  I think it's better to keep all breweries, dead or alive, in a single category. – ClockworkSoul 03:02, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subcat 

message: Some wise person went and submitted beer for the article improvement drive. If you get a chance, drop by and voice your support for it! – ClockworkSoul 03:05, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article improvement drive 

message: This article is much too long, and contains lots of great stuff, so I am spinning things out into seperate articles. Mostly they are new, but a few involve merges. Just done Mexican beer.Justinc 11:14, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Added proper article on Czech beer. The Czech stuff is pretty weak for such an important place, anyone fancy writing up more? Justinc 11:57, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Beer and nationality]] 

message: Good grief, can't believe I only just stumbled upon this project.  Mmmmm.  What's cooking at the moment? · Katefan0(scribble) 23:38, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
*Man, y'all have done a lot of work already.  A few of my favorite breweries aren't up yet though.  I just created a stub for Brewery Ommegang.  If anybody's still active, can you take a look and make sure I've got the format down?  Thanks · Katefan0(scribble) 14:58, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
*Hey, glad to have you on board! Lots of things cooking, as I gather you've found out by now, but feel free to help out however you want. I guess we've sort of all chipped in a bit everywhere, as well as concentrated our efforts on beers/breweries related to our favorite locales. Cheers! --Daniel11 23:17, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi folks, I'm Svartalf, I like beer, and I've already contributed what I could add that wasn't already there... which is admittedly very little, and unlikely to grow unless I take the improbable step of launching into major research on beery matters, and I've a lot of catching up to do on other subjects. So, is it fair that I should add myself to the member list? --Svartalf 01:18, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Svartalf, yes, definitely! We don't judge by how much of an expert you are or how many articles you've edited, just by how much you can drink ;) --Daniel11 04:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (No, we don't actually judge you by how much you can drink -- there's some kind of legal issue with that... But seriously, don't worry about being a guru on everything, I'm sure you can still find areas where you have a lot of useful knowledge to contribute, plus articles always need editing and linking and stuff like that. I personally know far less about beer than a lot of beeropedians (most?), but I still find a ton of places where I can make improvements. --Daniel11 04:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New member 

message: I came across Template:BeerBox and its friends just now. I see there's a comment up top saying they are being developed, but they haven't been touched since 18 Sep 2004 and there's no discussion here. Are they under development someplace else, or shall I take them all to TfD? -Splash 21:20, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beerbox et al being developed? 

message: A while ago we discussed whether to refer to the different kinds of beer as types (as was originally done on Wikipedia) or styles (the more proper term). We seem to have come to a consensus on using "styles." I just wanted to put this up here to remind us (myself included) that we should get around to renaming a few things, like :Category:Types of beer, to suit the name change, and make appropriate adjustments to the links in other articles. I'm just trying to think of things that we started off on the right path, but haven't really dug into in a cohesive fashion yet. I'm definitely really impressed by how much we've already improved the beer-related articles on Wikipedia, and how popular this project has become, and I guess I also wanted to use this comment as an excuse to thank all of you for the major improvements you've made. (I know, not that you've done it in any way for my benefit, but I do benefit anyway, so I think it's appropriate to say thank you). Um, not to get too teary-eyed about it ... so let's get the other stuff up to snuff too! :)
If you come up with any other ideas we threw around before and haven't really gotten around to fully implementing, please feel free to put them here (or below). Again, thanks! --Daniel11 04:28, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Types => Styles 

message: I recently made my very first article which happens to be about Cisk Lager. Now that I've found your WikiProject, I'd be glad to contribute in some way... I'm just not sure how. Should I become a member? Should I include your "Beer talk" info on the discussion page? I'm new to the actual Wiki Community... so I have no idea how these WikiProjects work. So erm... help!
RoderickH 13:41, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  I may have some contributions 

message: Hello all- I have prototyped a new way of presenting seasonal brews. It is currently in use in the stubs I created for Anderson Valley Brewing Company and Stone Brewing Company. In the examples section, I've added a comparison of how seasonal brews are currently presented, versus how they look with the new Template:brewbox_seasonal_beers: Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/Examples/Example2. Mike Dillon 06:07, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:Looks good, I'm wondering if a similar section should be put in for retired/discontinued beers and the like? Judzillah 12:21, 2005 August 12 (UTC)
::Thanks. After writing the example page, where I mentioned that a "Limited-Release Beers" section might be useful, I started to think that a header template with a parameter for the type would be desirable. If only the software supported default parameter values, we could change  to have this parameter while retaining type=Active as the default to match current behavior. That would cover all the possible variants, but it would also make it harder to achieve consistency of presentation. Mike Dillon 14:43, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
The  template has been obsoleted. The 1.6 release of MediaWiki added parameter value defaults, so I changed  to make the word "Active" a variable. It still defaults to "Active", so no existing pages were affected, but it allows editors to do things like "Seasonal Beers" or "Limited-Release Beers" or whatever makes sense for the brewery, but without a proliferation of ad-hoc templates. Mike Dillon 16:44, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seasonal Beers subsection in brewbox 

message: Hi everyone.  I have just found this project and was amazed to find that my favourite (non-european) brewery is not listed!  I have therefore added Namibia Breweries Limited, but keep in mind that this is my first Wikipedia page ever.  Please take a look and help where you can! Nicooosthuizen 13:31:39, 2005-08-19 (UTC)
:excellent article, keep up the good work. Justinc 10:57, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New page waiting for some attention 

message: For those of you who haven't already, you can add  to your user page, identifying you as a member of WP:WPB.
For those of you who already have, you can see where else the template shows up by looking here. --Daniel11 16:06, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Beer-project-member]] 

message: I think Real ale brewing process should be merged into Real ale.  It seems unnecessary to have it split into two articles.  Are there any objections to this?
I also would like to propose moving Real ale to Cask conditioning.
The reasons for this are threefold:
1. Real ale is CAMRA's term, but the proper term is cask-conditioned ale.
2. The article currently focuses on cask, and not bottle conditioning.
3. As the article states, "this fermentation process is by no means unique to ale", i.e. lagers can also be cask conditioned.
Please comment on Talk:Real ale.
--Dforest 07:15, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed the term "real ale" was invented by CAMRA, but it is now in common usage. I have no opinion on a proposed move from this title to something proper, but if it is to be cask-conditioned ale that would be wrong and just as bad as the term 'real ale'. Nobody brews ale anymore. Ale is brewed without hops or other preservatives. One should also note that beers can also be bottle-conditioned. Jooler 18:59, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

text: *Oppose. The article should definitely be left under the heading Real Ale, it is the common term by which those who will be likely to look for the page will want to find it, since it is the term that has permeated through the industry and society at large. The drink is referred to as such by retailers (both in supermarkets and pubs), brewers and even in, for instance, journalism. By all means have other sub threads linking to the Real Ale page and have other titles for the brew redirecting here but I fail to see how it makes any sense to change the heading. As for the pedantry of claiming that it isn't truly ale as it isn't hopped; "by the end of the [17th] century the distinction between ale and beer was becoming blurred. From James Lightbody's Every Man his Own Gauger, 1695, it appears that ale too was hopped at this period, though more lightly than beer." (Beer and Skittles, Richard Boston, 1976). Holypeanut 01:55, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge/move [[Real ale]] 

message: I added a redirect so that clicking on the beer mug image will bring the person to the beer project page.  The redirect does mean one has to do a couple steps to edit the image file, but I like getting to the project page easier. Let me know if the redirect should be removed.  Cafe Nervosa | talk 22:44, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There is also existing discussion at , including my opinions of why it should be changed back. Mike Dillon 22:51, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

text: It's a nice idea, but I agree with Mike Dillon that it's not really practical, and would probably be better off without the redirect. For getting to the project page easily, have you thought of using your watchlist or adding a link on your user page? Also, tlhere's a shortcut, WP:WPB, which also works in all lower case, wp:wpb. --Daniel11 01:41, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm, well, the lower-case link doesn't work, but if you type it in directly it works. --Daniel11 21:43, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Image:Beer Mug.png]] redirect, link from [[Template:Beer]]

message: My question is, Is the WikiProject Beer going to stay up to date going forward (and backward ) with the introduction and discontinuation of all brands of beer?  Also, as breweries change ownership, keeping up to date will b edifficult.  I don't think it can be done completely, however, adding the the year of introduction (and year of discontinuation) may be a little informative, particularily for the old brands, like Labatt Velvet Cream Stout.
:Well, I obviously don't speak for everyone, but is there anything impossible with staying up to date? I suppose it's a somewhat daunting effort, but I think it can be done. I'll wait to hear what other people think. (By the way, I definitely agree that adding the year of discontinuation for old beers is a good idea). --Daniel11 01:39, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: As of 2005

message: I'm new to this project and so I just wondered whether you could give me any advice on these pages: Crouch Vale Brewery, Nethergate brewery, Young's Brewery, Greene King and Ridley's brewery. I started the first two from scratch and altered the other three from various degrees (Greene King from a stub) and was wondering what you thought and how they fitted into your project. 
Holypeanut 01:55, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice pages. We tend to use the 2nd-level titles (with two equals signs around them) as the top level header. Also, your lists tend to get put onto one line by the wikipedia software -- try putting an asterisk at the beginning of each line to get a bulleted list. Help:Editing has the full list, but you seem to have got most of them already. Ojw 23:07, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Cheers for the input, it's good to know I'm going about things largely the right way. Thanks very much. I'll try and keep it up Holypeanut 00:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: New Contributions

message: I just started the article for the Dutch brewery Alfa.  It needs a bit of help, specifically catigorising the beers and an image.  I checked Dutch Wikipedia and they don't have one either.  Any suggestions?  Movementarian 20:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your contributions. I've tweaked things a little bit, but I can't help with your actual problems. All I did was change your link to the Dutch Wikipedia article to an interwiki link, suppressed the use of  and  (until they have an image and a production figure), and added :Category:Breweries of the Netherlands. I also interwiki'd the Dutch article back to your newly contributed article. Mike Dillon 21:11, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alfa 

message: Mountain Goat Beer and Piss Beer have been started, but I'm a crappy writer so if somone else could look over them that would be great. Agnte 14:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aussie Beer 

message: Hi folks. I just created Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/How to use the brewboxes, which was red-linked from a number of places. Feel free to provide feedback or edit it mercilessly. Mike Dillon 19:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Great job! I was going to edit it mercilessly, but it looks like you already did a pretty thorough job! I'll still look around again later, and see if there's anything I have worth adding. Thanks for doing that, I'd been meaning to start on that for a while, but at any rate I would never have done such a swell job of it... --Daniel11 20:54, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the kind words. Happy holidays! Mike Dillon 23:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Cheers, and happy holidays to you too! --Daniel11 01:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/How to use the brewboxes|How to use the brewboxes]] created 

message: I've added a new section to the project page, highlighting some articles where Beeropedians may wish to edit (or create the article if there's nothing there yet). Instead of an article of the month, which might lapse into disuse, this is a place where we can put any relevant articles we'd like to see more work done on, to draw the attention of fellow Beeropedians who might like to help out. Also, if you joined the project and aren't sure what to do -- i.e., where you can be of help, what areas are currently active, etc. -- you can look here to gather some ideas. Hope this helps, and as usual feel free to add lots of your own stuff to the section. --Daniel11 06:57, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New section on project page 

message: Could someone cobble together a Userbox? You can call me Al 21:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Userboxes 

message: I'm slowly making some beer edits and my proposal over on Talk:Kwak probably needs more exposure. There doesn't seem to be much here with enough specific detail.
For the Kwak page, it's currently one page on the particular beer, with no separate page for the brewery. I'm thinking that there should in fact be an article on the brewery itself, with the beer page being a redirect to the brewery page. As it's a fairly small brewery with only two or three beers, the brewery itself only takes a paragraph, and the beers would come up fairly quickly in the article.
Therefore, the question is whether notable beers from small breweries should be described on the brewery page, or whether the beers themselves should occupy their own pages. This already occurs for mostTrappist beers, so perhaps it's a useful guidenline?
I'm pondering all of this as I'd like to eventually see all of the beer related pages done with a similar structure so that we can have some consistency. User:Riflemann
:(You can sign your name with ~~~ or by clicking the scripty signature in the toolbox while editing a page, and it will look like this: Daniel11) or this: --Daniel11 23:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oops I normally do! Too much beer (oh i wish, was just tired) :) Riflemann 08:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate brewery and beer pages? 

message: I'm new here, but some of you have noticed that I've been tearing into the British Breweries and other beer related articles with great glee and abandon over the past couple of days. There's a lot of work to be done. And I like that! I'm the British Admin on RateBeer. I started the clean up of the mess that was the British Breweries on that website back in 2002. I would love to help clean up here. I am very keen on accuracy, conformity, cleanliness, well written and helpful articles. I will make mistakes. I'm new to the Wiki way. But my heart is in the right place. 
I don't know who is part of the British Brewery Team. It would be good at this stage to get everyone together who is interested or has some knowledge about British Breweries so we can work out a common approach so that each Brewery page follows the same format.
So - who is part of the British Brewery Team? 
SilkTork 17:50, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm always glad to help.  I'm a RealBeer.com regular myself (lapsed recently).  Just had a lovely Gales Christmas '05 on tap last week! Katefan0(scribble)/mrp 18:17, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Brummie beer nut here. --Pypex 17:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  British Breweries 

message: Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? Please post your suggestions here. Thanks a lot! Gflores Talk 17:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project 

message: Hey, everyone! I just created a new page for les Brasseries du Cameroun, Cameroon's major brewery. I used this project's infobox, and it looks great! However, I do have one suggestion: In keeping with Wikipedia:Avoid self-references, we should probably drop the final line from the infobox ("This article forms part of a series on beers and breweries of the world. (Project)"). — BrianSmithson 15:32, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, and one more thing: Is is possible to add an optional section to the infobox for other beverages bottled by the brewery? Les Brasseries bottles Coca-Cola and its own soft drink brands, and I'd imagine many breweries in the developing world do the same. Perhaps a section called "Other beverages" or "Other products"? — BrianSmithson 15:35, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Removed. — BrianSmithson 18:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I didn't get around to this before, I've been busy and only saw it now, after you've removed it. Do you know whether that is basically a guidline, or if it's more of a rule? I personally think that the line is quite effective and useful there, and would object to its removal if that's not strictly necessary. Please let me know what you know.... --Daniel11 19:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox and self references 

message: I came across this WP too late! :) I've recently gotten Cheers up to FA status, and I am currently pushing for it to be the front page article for Saint Patrick's Day. Any touch-ups from you beer-folk to the article would be great! (as I'm still technically underage I don't think I'll join this project just yet. ;) )Staxringold 15:24, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Cheers]]

message: The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template .
The discussion about this can be found here.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass.  Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
=== Background ===
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace.  On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you.     — The Transhumanist    07:27, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject collaboration notice from the [[WP:WPPORT|Portals WikiProject]] 

message: On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace.  On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you.     — The Transhumanist    07:27, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background 

message: Hello,Please note that Pub session, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! 
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement! 

message: Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured quality source review RFC 

message: A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
:– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A new newsletter directory is out! 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:WPB. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Steel1943 (talk) 15:39, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia:WPB listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for information on WP1.0 web tool