Template talk:Wines

message: I am unsure why the  template was merged into this one, and feel it should be split back.
:Support as per above. ◄§ĉҺɑʀκs► 07:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wine by country

message: Re: "clutter" See Chancellor (grape) Agne 06:29, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Case in Point 

message: How about starting with the most "obvious" major grapes
*Red  Cabernet Sauvignon | Malbec | Merlot | Petite sirah | Pinotage | Pinot Noir | Sangiovese | Syrah/Shiraz | Tempranillo |  Zinfandel/primitivo
*White  Albariño | Chardonnay | Chenin Blanc | Gewürztraminer | Muscat |Pinot Gris/Grigio | Riesling | Sauvignon blanc | Sémillon | Viognier
 Now the "iffy" ones
*Iffy Reds Cabernet Franc |  Carmenère | Charbono | Gamay |Grenache | Muscadine | Négrette | Petit verdot | Valdiguié |
*Iffy Whites   Pinot Blanc 
The "iffies" are ones that very rarely made into single bottle varietals and would be best served as a link to the List_of_grape_varieties. Any thoughts? Agne 09:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we had a good selection, worked out by consensus here (extensive discussion above), until about 1-2 weeks ago when a few more obscure blending grapes were added (I believe Négrette and Petit verdot were among them).  Otherwise, I think the list in the template as it stands is a good one.  Badagnani 09:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Speaking from my own experience, I drink many of these and refer to the template often, following its links to find out more about each grape/style.  Thus, the template is far from being of "no benefit" to me.  In fact, I'm quite happy with it and was fine with the compromise of leaving out the extremely obscure grapes (though Nero d'Avola is a favorite and I was sorry to see it go).  I disagree that this template be tailored primarily for the "entry level" wine drinker.  If they learn about a new grape with an unfamiliar name such as Gewurztraminer, Viogner, or Malbec, however, all the better; they'll know something they didn't before and perhaps they'll try that one out and be pleasantly surprised.  Badagnani 10:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, personally I prefer the more unusual grapes though I of course haven't tried them all.  But there's no evidence as to the drinking preferences or habits of our users.  Further, as you know, a wine store owner can evaluate the flavor characteristics a customer likes and often suggest a rarer wine that the customer might like even more.  That is definitely true of beers.  I always listen to the recommendations of my wine store workers regarding both, and appreciate their expertise very much.  I reiterate my support for preserving the list as we have it (with the exception of the few obscure ones that were added over the past week or so).  Badagnani 10:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Keep in mind also that we have readers everywhere in the world, including nations with grapes that are famous in those countries.  Hence the inclusion of one or other of the most prominent Spanish, Hungarian, South American, etc. grapes.  It's a very good idea, one which I don't think is at all excessive.  Badagnani 10:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

text: This is the recent edit in which some obscure grapes were added.  Badagnani 10:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a very worthwhile point to be mindful of but also the fact that this is the English language version and so our scope doesn't need to be quite so broad. I'm sure those grapes are very amply covered in the Spanish, Hungarian, Portuguese, etc wikipedias. I also appreciate the need to introduce drinkers to new wines and new experiences but there is a limit to the useful and extent that a template can do. A template is a navigational tool and the usefulness of that tool is intimately tied into how focused and clear it is. Too much info is distracting and discouraging.Agne 10:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Now in trying to steer towards a compromise, I've added a "See Also" section and made more clear and direct the links to the very valuable information in the List of grape varieties and List of wine-producing regions. I think having these links will help tighten the template and still provide a service for the curious reader and to help introduce novices to new grapes and regions. I think that covers a lot of bases and a lot of the concerns that have been addressed. Agne 10:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that Carmenere (and one I'd added earlier, Tannat) are rarely encountered as single-grape wines thought one does see such from time to time.  Similarly, I'm not sure Albariño needs to be there as we already have Vinho Verde listed. These would be near the bottom end of a continuum from "most prevalent" to "least commonly found."  Badagnani 11:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have tidied up list of grape varieties, and changed grouping names to "Top 20 by acreage" and "Top 21-50 by acreage", reducing varieties listed to 50 per colour. Also added a "See full list" link for each colour. Top 50 varieties based on Anderson, K. and N. Aryal, Database of Regional, National and Global Winegrape Bearing Areas by Variety, 2000 and 2010, Wine Economics Research Centre, University of Adelaide, December 2013, revised July 2014. https://www.adelaide.edu.au/wine-econ/databases/winegrapes/ Fpr155 (talk) 16:21, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Varietal Grapes 

message: The recent edits to the design and colors of the template are very nice, and elegant, befitting the subject.  Badagnani 17:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very nice 

message: Is Kakheti a very notable wine region, when the WP article doesn't mention wine at all?
On another subject, the template is looking better and better.  To the editor who figured out how to split the middle part into two columns, that's great--I never would have figured out how to do that, and it looks wonderful.  Badagnani 01:52, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, I also believe there are other regions in the template with similar issues. It may be time for a cleanup of the "notable" regions section. I suggest that this template only links to "wine-region specific" articles similar to how the  template only links to "country specific" wine articles. If the wine region article does not exist it is not included. Thanks for the feedback regarding my template update too. ◄scharks► 13:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed Kakheti.  Per extensive previous discussions, the point of the regions section (which used to be named regionals) is for wines whose primarly descriptor on the label is the region name.--Mikebrand 01:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Kakheti]] 

message: Why isn't it listed? -- Fyslee/talk 08:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would support its listing. You certainly see the region printed on wine bottles. AgneCheese/Wine 08:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Per previous discussions, a region such as Napa would not be listed because Napa is not a wine's *primary* designation.  That is, a wine is not known as a Napa in the sense that a wine would be known as a Chianti or a Chablis.  The primary designation for a wine from Napa will be its varietal: Merlot, Chardonnay, etc.  The current list is in need of a cleanup as some regions (not regionals) have made their way into the list.--Mikebrand 11:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually Mike, for wines that are blends and not 75% of more of a single varietal, you will see the regional designation of "Napa Valley Red Wine" or "Napa Valley White Wine". AgneCheese/Wine 19:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, good point.  Then Napa Valley would seem to fit the criteria for the regionals section. --Mikebrand 01:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I would support Napa's listing as well.  Overly strict adherence to such a rule (which leaves out extremely major wine-growing regions) is something only a few editors support.  Badagnani 16:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

text: It is confusing and mostly because many people over many months have made small changes that were not all coordinated.  I have de-linked the "regionals" term from the "regions" page because, as you point out, the link is already at the bottom of the page in a clear manner.  That wasn't the only confusing link as "wine styles" linked to an article on winemaking (which I moved to a separate link at the bottom of the page). --Mikebrand 01:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Definitely improvements. -- Fyslee/talk 07:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Napa Valley AVA|Napa Valley (wine)]] 

message: I know the template issue has been discussed thouroughly, but I do find it odd that grapes such as Durif (Petite Sirah), Dolcetto and Carménère are deemed appropriate for listing but Nebbiolo is not.  It really is the most highly regarded red grape in Piedmont.  Shouldn't it be included and these three dropped? Just a thought.Ee60640 03:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If Nebbiolo is very prominent you should add it. I just got a bottle of Dolcetto and it's not the best known, but I don't think it's extremely obscure. I don't know who added Durif or when; do you regard it as extremely obscure. Carmenere is a blending grape but does show up these days as a single-grape wine. Badagnani 03:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Between Petite Sirah (a much more common name then Durif) and Nebbiolo, I would say the two are darn close to the same in terms of prominence and familarity with the average wine drinker (and presumably the average wikipedia reader). Look at Wine Spectator's hits 359 Petite Sirah ratings to 303 Nebbiolo ratings-including blends and  569 article mentions of Petite Sirah to 504 article mentions of Nebbiolo. This doesn't even count the additional hits on the alternative name "Durif" and the misspelling "Petite Syrah". Considering that the grape is one of the oldest in California (second only to Zinfindel) and is also quickly emerging as the premier grape in the growing Mexican wine industry, I just can not see how one could argue for its exclusion when its "notability" is arguable on par with the grape you are adding. Now, as I said before, if we want to do a wholesale condensing of the template (which I have supported before), I can see removing it along with Nebbiolo and others to leave just 10-12 truly "major" grapes in place. But if we are not doing that wholesale condensing then I don't see a justification for its exclusion. AgneCheese/Wine 07:47, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm actually thinking of creating a separate Petite Sirah article since there are actually three grapes that are made as wines as Petite Sirah and some of the California's vines are actually not Durif. I think a full article could be written on both Durif and Petite Sirah. But until I (or someone else) get time to write those articles I think the template should include Durif/Petite Sirah AgneCheese/Wine 07:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no real interest in debating this, leave Petite Sirah/Durif in if you want.  I was simply trying to avoid cluttering up the template due to the discussion that took place above.  I will take issue with the idea that if it is dropped then Nebbiolo should be as well.  While you found roughly equivilant numbers in the Wine Specator wine rating search function and article search for the two grapes, if you had run Barolo or Barbaresco you would have gotten 2172 and 970 hits respectively for wine ratings.  For the article search Barolo had 1430 mentions and Barbaresco had 780.  Since both wines are 100% Nebbiolo it seems to me a stonger case can be made for including Nebbiolo than Petite Sirah, using your own method to determine the importance of a grape. I think Nebbiolo and Sangiovese are without doubt two major red grapes from Italy that would need to be included if this list were cut down to 10-12 major wines.  Don't get me wrong, there are many wines made from Petite Sirah that are superb.  I just thought the entire idea here was to keep the template from getting cluttered. Ee60640 23:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought about that when I was doing the search but then I realized that wouldn't be a valid comparison since Barolo and Barbaresco are two separate articles with Barolo already noted in the template in the Regions area. The average wikipedia reader interested in information on Barolo will most likely search for that article rather then the Nebbiolo one (and would then thusly be wiki-linked to the grape article). One looking for information on Petite Sirah are going to be looking for Petite Sirah. Keep in mind that a template is meant to be a navigational tool and to compare the two grapes (for purpose of this template) you need to compare them as the grape articles rather then the separate wine. In that vein, the two are on quite the same level. Barolo and Barbaresco would be more on par to compare with a Bordeaux or Rhone.AgneCheese/Wine 05:48, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, I will respectfully disagree with you.  Bordeaux and Rhone wines are not an apt comparison because they are made from a blend of several grapes while both Barolo and Barbaresco are 100% Nebbiolo.  Go to Wine Geeks, Wine Pros  or Epicurious and you will see reference to Nebbiolo as possibly the most important red grape in Italy.  As I already stated, Nebbiolo and Sangiovese are the two major red grapes in Italy in terms of the notariety of the wines they are used to produce.  Would you exclude Sangiovese being listed in the template because it is more commonly sold as a Chianti, Brunello, Rosso di Montalcino, etc?  Petite Sirah is largely grown in California and the Pacific Northwest and this is the primary region of its popularity.  It is a clone created in the 1920's.  Wines made from Nebbiolo have been highly prized since at least the 14th century. As for the template being a navigational tool I understand that.  The Barolo article would interest someone seeking information about the wine.  I think it likely that someone interested in the wine would also have an interest in finding out more information about the grape just as someone reading the article about Bordeaux would have an interest in reading about Cab Sauv, Cab Franc, etc.  Additionally there are increasing numbers of winemakers working to grow Nebbiolo in areas outside Piedmont, California being one of the major regions where this is being done.  I think that is another reason a Wiki user would have an interest in information about the grape seperately from Barolo, etc. Ee60640 16:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template Issue 

message: Someone just removed lots of things from the template, and from the edit summary I assume s/he found the template on the Beaujolais wine page and assumed the template was just for Beaujolais wines--and removed non-Beaujolais things accordingly. Badagnani 00:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it looks like that. Good call. AgneCheese/Wine 02:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removals 

message: Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wine#Vegan_wine.2C_Organic_wine.2C_Natural_wine_and_Kosher_wine to share your views on the wine styles listed in the template. AgneCheese/Wine 19:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion on wine styles in template

message: I have re-inserted the (notable regionals) links removed recently from this template. I would suggest a discussion of what is notable and what is not before readjusting this. Georgeg 17:19, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I support any attempts to clean up the template and make it more manageable. A listing of 33 region is a bit overbearing. Ideally it would be nice to get that down to 15-20. AgneCheese/Wine 17:32, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I support that too. Shall I remove a few of my picking?! Georgeg 17:49, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the problem that I find with the template (and looking at the history is easy confirmation) is that everyone has an opinion on what constitute a "notable" wine region and attempts to stay more mainstream can always be countered (and somewhat correctly) as systematic bias. My personal preference would be to do away with the section in favor of moving the List of wine-producing regions and List of wine-producing countries from the See Also section to its own areas. In my opinion those two links more then cover the subject matter and can direct the "curious reader" to any notable region they would like to see. That is my first choice. Second choice would be modifying the list below. AgneCheese/Wine 18:17, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removals

message: In this template you refer to the region Fetească and it wikilinks to the word.   Problem ...
# This is a disambiguation page
# Your region is not defined on the page
Action required: Please develop the region page by that name, and fix this template to point to that page.  Thanks. -- billinghurst (talk) 02:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ugh....looks like more "link creep" has occurred. This templates needs to be paired back down to the essentials. I'll take a look. AgneCheese/Wine 02:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fetească -- disambiguation required 

message: Could someone more code savvy merge the two grape sections into a title called "Major grapes" and include: Whites
Chardonnay Chenin blanc Gewürztraminer Muscat Pinot blanc Pinot grisRiesling Sauvignon blanc Sémillon ({·}} Viognier Reds Cabernet Franc Cabernet Sauvignon Gamay Grenache Malbec Nebbiolo Merlot  Pinot noir  Pinotage Sangiovese Syrah/Shiraz  Tempranillo Zinfandel 
We already have a link to all grape varieties so we need to try and keep this as focused as possible. AgneCheese/Wine 02:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I will work on it tonite. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 02:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Since I can't fix this without messing up the code

message: Portugal, with three regions listed (Madeira, Port, and Vinho Verde), gets relegated to the "Other" section, while New Zealand, with a single region, gets it own section.  What is that about?  --Nricardo (talk) 16:45, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As I've said many times before, this template needs a significant overhaul. Unfortunately I'm not "code savvy" enough to figure out how to do this. AgneCheese/Wine 20:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I can hack at it, but some editorial decisions need to be made since ATM, "Major wine regions" is a confusing soup of  wine styles, major wine regions and subregions. My opinion is that such a template shouldn't try too much, ie suffice to let Amarone, Soave, Valpolicella be Veneto, let Muscadet, Pouilly-Fumé, Vouvray, Sancerre be Loire, etc.. I can pluck at a version of how I would prefer it. MURGH disc. 10:57, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely agree, and ditto for several other project-wide templates. Tomas e (talk) 12:51, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Here is a draft. Some chopping and more clinincal on the regions, rather than "list of famous wine styles", right now with some omissions where region article don't exist and some links where there is no regional article :^/  Please suggest where to go next. MURGH disc. 12:49, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

text: Thanks. Yes I agree with the line drawn for 'major regions', and though Mendoza, Central Valley, Maipo and such aren't obscure, we should keep it as tight as possible. In the case of South Africa I'm in doubt since Stellenbosch, Paarl (+Franschhoek) in another context would be in the same Cape winelands region, more distinguished as belonging to different "pockets". Swartland (mind, home to Sadie, Lammerschoek, Allesverloren etc.) would have some merit to stand apart, but I'm more inclined to squeeze SA in with "other". Any other ideas, cuts or inclusions? MURGH disc. 22:25, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: If no objections then I'll insert this code for the old one and further modifications bemade to it. MURGH disc. 10:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portugal 

message: On what basis is the division of grape varieties made?  Chenin Blanc, for example, is listed as a regional variety, despite accounting for a fifth of all South African plantings, and also having a major presence in California.  Does there exist a consensus among wine authorities what the criteria for designating a variety as regional versus international are?
If we feel the need to separate varieties into two tiers, and can't rely on an external consensus to do so, then it seems we should simply look at worldwide production and see if there's a natural place to draw a line, and then classify the varieties as "major" and "minor".  Otherwise we have to come up with an yet more arbitrary criterion such as "accounts for >5% of plantings in at least three countries or >5% of plantings in at least five regions or >20% of plantings in at least three regions not all in the same country", or something like that. --Atemperman (talk) 20:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO, the "regional varieties" should just be cut as well as a substantial trimming of the wine region section as part of a general overhaul of this horrendous template. This template just has major issues all around with the foremost being the desire to cram entirely too much info in. AgneCheese/Wine 21:36, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never liked this template - it's too big, and it uses some vaguely defined terms with unclear inclusion criteria. As to Chenin Blanc, I wouldn't call it a true international variety, because it plays an important role "only" in Loire and South Africa, while the truly international ones (Chardonnay, Merlot, ...) are found almost all over. But "regional" isn't a the obvious only term for "important grapes not found everywhere". While Nebbiolo could probably be called regional, Tempranillo is found all over Spain, Pinot Blanc are found in several European countries, Grenache probably is international, and on it goes. Sigh. Tomas e (talk) 22:28, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I like the layout of this template, it is a little cluttered, but there's a lot to know about wine and I appreciate the information density, I think it achieves a middle ground between the exhaustive 'list of varietals' and the top 5. The regional/international distinction is a bit fuzzy, but I think the difference could be quantified by some combination of # of acres globally, and # continents where there are significant plantings. CabSav or Chardonnay have a major presence on 6 continents, and account for a huge volume of varietal wine. Chenin blanc has significant acreage on 3 continents, but I doubt the volume of production globally is even close to Chardonnay or Pinot Grigio. Replacing the term "International" with "Global" might be more accurate, but I think International/Regional is more common parlance.  Inclusion in the Regional list seems the most arbitrary to me, Bobal? Mencia? I love learning about new varietals, but these are pretty minor to put next to Zinfandel and Chenin Blanc. Perhaps the regional list could include a link to an expanded sub-template of national varietals?   76.92.230.40 (talk) 02:32, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  International vs. Regional 

message: The list is not neutral (why Alsace, Oregon but not China, Russia etc.). The entries there should strictly reflect List of wine-producing regions or be deleted. I think the latter option makes more sense since there is already a  navbox. Zach (Talk) 18:18, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Replaced the list with old vs new world wine. Zach (Talk) 11:12, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major regions