Talk:Barrel

message: I don't think this article, and the one on Kegs do enough to clarify the difference between an ale cask, and a keg. Whereas they are physically similar in appearance, they are very different. A keg is usually used to serve pasteurised ale, with the aid of nitrogen to get the beer out of the keg, whereas a cask is held horizontally. A cask contains yeast, and is spiled with a hard spile until it is ready to serve, when a soft spile is used. It probably needs links to Cask ale too.
I'd be more than happy to make these changes. -M0RHI 18:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cask / Keg distinction

message: I would like to hear what other contributors think about the "over a barrel" section.
Which of these is more suitable to the article about barrels, this version:
: Being over a barrel is to be in a predicament, or helpless in a situation where others are in control. ("I have no choice in the matter—my creditors have me over a barrel.") The phrase is said to originate from either of two 19th century practices: rolling drowning victims over a barrel to clear their lungs of water, or flogging someone who is bent over a barrel.
or this one:
: Being over a barrel is to be in a predicament, or helpless in a situation where others are in control. ("I have no choice in the matter—my creditors have me over a barrel."). The origin of the expression may be that commonly available timber barrel has been used as a cheap and convenient alternative to more elaborate whipping posts and other, often more 'ritual', apparatus for  corporal punishment, either in the private sphere (where it may be a pervertible) or for official, possibly public, administration of lashes to the posterior of a bend-over culprit, as the following links show still common practice in the British 1899-1902 Boers-repression (South Africa and prisoner exile on the Bermudas, whipping naked boys as artist-illustrated) and even in 1937 Ohio village marshall strapping juveniles; as lashes above the waist are generally administered to a straight back, then a whipping pole or a bench is preferred.
: * compare the barrel pillory or Spanish mantle. Another possible origin is the 19th century practice of rolling drowning victims over a barrel to clear their lungs of water.
: However in a nautical context, at least, 'over the barrel' referred to a gun barrel, which was referred to by the common term kissing the gunner's daughter for similar punishment, in the Royal Navy rather frequently applied, for the graver offences with a reduced cat or a birch, to thus bend-over ship boys' (till the 19th century publicly bared) buttocks.
Thanks for your feedback! --Michael Geary 16:38, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The shorter version. I find it impossible to understand why is is necessary or desirable to have this degree of detail about corporal punishment in an article on an unrelated topic. This is not Wipipedia, where this would be welcome and appropriate. Here, it is ridiculous and makes Wikipedia look obsessed with corporal punishment. 82.45.248.177 17:19, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The shorter version. All these lengthy and enthusiastic references to flogging and to positioning of victims (especially children) and to naked posteriors are completely off topic and distasteful. It seems to be the same editor who is adding this stuff all over Wikipedia, going to almost any article about anything that could conceivably be used to hit someone with, and then inserting a paragraph about children and bare bottoms. It makes the articles look ridiculous, unprofessional, and sordid. He has been asked again and again to stop, but just keeps reverting, without joining in the discussion. It's a shame, but I suppose the only solution, if he won't communicate with us, is to keep on taking out this stuff as often as he puts it in. AnnH ♫ 17:28, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The shorter version, per the above. (That's only 2999999997 to go I guess.) On a side note, the next possible step to a solution would be going through all the red tape of filing a Request for comment on this user's conduct. Femto 17:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am afraid that I think an RFC is long overdue here. It is making an absolute mockery of the encyclopaedia: one user and his private view dominating all others. It should not continue. 82.45.248.177 23:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  "over a barrel" ext link now broken —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vernon39 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree. I've deleted that bit. Matt Deres 12:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Over a barrel 

message: Visited the Guinness brewery in Dublin on 30 Jul 06 and these are the cask sizes in use there until approx 50 years ago:
* Pin 4.25 gallons
* Firkin 8.5 gallons
* Kilderkin 16.75
* Barrel 33
* Butt 107
--Gak 20:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Guinness

message: It is just the spot market that quotes oil in barrels - all long term contracts are signed in metric tonnes - MT. So the trade is done by weight and not by volume. The specific weight for oils will vary - estimated as 1180 liters of petrol or 1124 liters of crude is considered to be a "Metric Tonne" - MT.
7,421850 converts $/bbl of petrol to $/MT
7,069627 converts $/bbl of crude to $/MT
311,7177 converts $/gln of petrol $/MT
296,9243 converts $/gln of crude $/MT
-- if you do not have time to use the specific weight given.
KH Flottorp 07:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good Article; Please add more info 

message: Renamed to standard External links. If a link is a vital source please cite it as reference in a separate References section. Femto 11:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources and External links 

message: I have removed this link to illustration of useless calculations:
* Barrel size calculationsGregorydavid 14:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure it's useful for a winemaker but Wikipedia is not a wine making guide.Agne 21:53, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Useless calculations

message: "each 42-US-gallon barrel making about 19½ gallons of gasoline.[citation needed][1]"
See http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/whats_in_barrel_oil.html. Its 51.4% or 21.5 gallons
Don Clark (talk) 20:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Data error

message: I can find no evidence of any historical basis for this phrase anywhere, other than the punchline to an old joke. I've removed it, and added some other uses (of the term) more pertinent to the roll (haha) of the barrel shape/style in other areas. Not sure if it's worth pointing to the disambig page again here but it's relevant enough, as this page describes the basis for all other uses of the word. --mikaultalk 13:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Your turn" etc 

message: We need better information about history and physical aspects of barrels.  We need to know actual physical dimensions of typical traditional barrels.  We need to know about the guilds and regulations pertaining thereto.  We need better illustrations, calling out all the parts, like http://www.ukcraftfairs.com/coopering.asp.  We need pictures of all the tools for making barrels... We need to know where in the world real functional traditional wooden barrels are still made, how many are made, and what they are used for.
-69.87.199.40 (talk) 00:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: While I agree that this article is in desperate need of expansion (I have somewhat of a passion for coopering) I don't believe it warrants skirting the wikipedia guidlines inorder to be acheived. While the information you added was entirely relevant, copy-pasting is not the way to do it on wikipedia. The sources you use are definately reliable, accurate and informative, try to paraphrase what they are saying, instead of copying it verbatim. I'll have a look over the sources myself and see if anything can be made of them - however please feel free to contribute again, but without breaking any copyright. Cheers, ABVS1936 (talk) 10:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

text: When it comes to wine barrels, the article Oak (wine) actually has more info on construction and treatment of such barrels than this article does. Tomas e (talk) 12:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: physical aspects

message: Weird culture:  In the US, images of people wearing barrels have long been used as a symbol of poverty (to cover nakedness?), in both cartoons and movies.  Should this be in the article?  Which cultures use this symbol, starting when?
-69.87.199.40 (talk) 00:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: wearing a barrel

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  banner as it falls under :Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 04:13, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: A barrel consists of parts not known to many people, since they are special terms: e. g. the stave which are the wood strips that form the barrel; or the hoops, which are the metal rings that stabilize the barrel and so on. I found a nice graphics which illustrates this: http://www.juicegrape.com/kb/attachments/M&M%20Barrel%20Care-GUIDe9f235cd643740c6a9e0b682e88437aa.pdf however, we CANNOT simply copy that off the document. Drawing the barrel anew could avoid a copyright violation, though. -andy 85.176.227.112 (talk) 01:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor article. 

message: A couple of the measurements given in the Oil section conflict. Also, the Standard Oil drum in the photo is given to be 55 gallons, which contradicts the text. Its US/imperial conversion also contradicts the text. 24.7.178.142 (talk) 04:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discrepancies in Oil 

message: Could someone please explain why this article defines barrels as being "conical"? It has been this way since Cowper revised it on October 17th, 2009 and the definition has persisted through multiple revisions. I very rarely see barrels described as being anything other than cylindrical and will revert the instance of "conical" in the first sentence to "cylindrical" unless someone can justify why the current phrasing provides a better definition of "barrel".
Antidespotic (talk) 03:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Conical? ''Conical?''

message: US or Imperial Gallon
:One of the immediate questions I had when reading the first section of this article is what Gallons are we referring to when we say a Wine Barrel, etc. is so many Gallons? This is a big problem if it's not stated, many people are not aware that there have been and still are different volume's of a "Gallon".  173.66.219.108 (talk) 17:16, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which Gallon 

message: Can we standardise units in this article? They are all over the place at the moment. I suggest the metric unit takes precedence in most cases, except where there's something that's country-specific, such as Scottish whisky, in which case the most commonly used unit should be used in the first instance. The Skywatcher and me (talk) 16:55, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standardise units 

message: Would this be the appropriate article to talk about barrels in other cultures? In Japan, for example, sake was traditionally kept in barrels called "taru." (樽) Taru are also used in some genres of traditional Japanese music. My knowledge of Japanese taru is very limited, but I wanted to suggest we include barrels in other cultures.KogeJoe (talk) 02:28, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Cultures 

message: Despite making it clear that fluids are stored in wooden barrels, the article doesn't explain what makes the barrels watertight. Can someone explain this? The article seems deficient without it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.20.8.91 (talk) 21:02, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Method of construction? 

message: Where to begin?  The Celts or actually it's Kelts from the Greek tongue, were not in Burgundy until 275 BC not 2300 BCE, that is very speculative and not supported by ANY archaeological discoveries.  What do "we know now" that discredits the very well documented and accurate Greek histories?  The Celts are originally from Asia Minor and do not enter into the "Valkania" (or Balkans) to settle until the dispersing of the Scythian clans.  The Celts spread out after the Macedonian Greeks gained control of the northern frontier of the empire.  
A inland dwelling Celtic society had no technical knowledge of how to build casks, it has always been linked to shipbuilding.
Diogenes supposedly lived in a barrel in ancient Corinth, Greece.
Casks or Barrels were usually very large containing usually over 1,000 gallon equivalents that is why they were not common in the Hellenic world.
These (first) casks were not sealed, they had doors that remained above a fill level of liquid, the doors are designed to wedge closed on a temporary wax and linen gasket so that they could reopened.
These casks were rebuilt or repaired repeatedly and some casks had a lifespan that lasted several hundred years.  Some of the casks may still exist and are captured in many photographs.  Some of the contemporary casks have been dated back to medieval Greece (based on field/property allotment records)and exactly imitate the ancient design.
Oh and as far as wine-making goes, grapes are ONLY indigenous to Near Asia, the oldest known seeds were discovered in what is now Turkey dating back at least 8,000 years.  One wonders what the Celts put inside their imaginary barrels since grapes did not grow in France at that time or in the northern mountains or "valkania" of the Greek states.
IF the Celts had grape seeds at all as they traveled and resettled in western Europe, the only explanation is that the seeds came from Asia Minor and that it has a shared origin coming from the Homeric Greek peoples of Asia.
The first "cask" was mostly likely a ship hull which was partitioned and filled with wine (or olive oil) that mostly likely makes it impossible that the Celtics originated it.  The cask is probably thousands of years old, maybe as old as the city of Ur.
A VERY BAD 'HISTORY' SECTION INDEED!  Of little value in understanding the craft of 'coopering' and it's origins.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.182.147.217 (talk) 03:42, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There are late Roman sculptures that show freight boats on the Rhine carrying barrels. (maybe third or fourth centuries) Peter Flass (talk) 20:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "History ?" Section. 

message: The first paragraph of the lede says: For example, a beer barrel had originally a capacity of 36 US gallons (140 L) while an ale barrel a capacity of 32 US gallons (120 L). Wine was shipped in barrels of 31.5 US gallons (119 L). Beer and wine barrels were already standardized in many parts of Europe, including England, before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock, and probably before Columbus discovered America. Zupko's British Weights and Measures and R D Connor's English Weights and Measures should have some information on this, but I'd need to special-order them through interlibrary loan. Zyxwv99 (talk) 13:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is true, however, the US gallon is based on the old English gallon, and the current British gallon - the Imperial gallon - is significantly larger than the previous English gallon and the contemporary US gallon. I suppose the best way to handle it would be to just use the unqualified 'gallon'? I shall see if i can find what the source says. Firejuggler86 (talk) 03:01, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

text: @Zyxwv99 Yes, that's right Shahrokh889 (talk) 04:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beer and wine barrels invented in the USA? 

message: I have assessed this page within the WikiProject Beer as importance C and quality mid, because this is in line with what is done for the Wine project and is valid for beer as well in my opinion. If you do not agree, feel free to adjust the assessment, please read the guidelines Wikipedia:WikiProject_Beer/Assessment#Instructions beforehand. CRwikiCA (talk) 16:03, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: WikiProject Beer Assessment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Barrel. 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/20120817003820/http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=21224b7c634d83e0fa329bfd18bb85dc&rgn=div8&view=text&node=27%3A1.0.1.1.3.3.25.2&idno=27 to http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=21224b7c634d83e0fa329bfd18bb85dc&rgn=div8&view=text&node=27%3A1.0.1.1.3.3.25.2&idno=27
*Added  tag to http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F-27/C.R.C.-c.870/section-B.02.020.html
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) 05:17, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article had an unsourced section about the "devil's cut". I just rewrote that section and removed use of that term.
Although "angel's share" is a commonly used term, "devil's cut" seems much less well accepted as a term. The term has been trademarked as the name of a particular whiskey brand introduced by Beam Suntory around 2010 or 2011 (see here) that is discussed in the Jim Beam article. Some sources say Beam coined the term itself (see here and here). The company says "We call that the devil's cut", which implies that this is what that company calls it, not what everyone calls it.
I suspect that we should not be using that term in this article as if it is a commonly used concept, because it does not seem like a generic commonly-used term. Its use may promote that particular branded product. The company's use of the term does not seem completely original, since there was a 1970 women's romance novel by that name that had something to do with a whiskey-making family in Kentucky, and the book was in a series with another book called The Angel's Share. (See the publisher's site here where it specifically says it is a women's romance novel.) Other than that book, I have found no other sources that were using that term prior to 2010. I don't know for certain whether the meaning of the term in the romance novel was the same as how it is used here. There is a band formed in 2010, but it seems possible that the band was named after the Beam brand, because they came out at around the same time. There is also an album produced in 2013, a different book that uses that phrase in its title and was published in 2016, and a night club in Edinburgh that probably hasn't been around very long either. But a web search for "Devil's cut" is very heavily dominated by that specific Beam whiskey product.
It may be worth mentioning that the Beam product is not made from only the extracted barrel dregs. It is a mixture of the barrel extract and regular bourbon whiskey. There also doesn't seem to be any clear description of what percentage of the products is made from the barrel etract. I personally suspect that the percentage is small, and the brand name is as much a matter of marketing spin as it is a distinct product. According to some sources I have seen, that brand is not the only one that uses extracted extra juice from "empty" barrels, but I think it is the only one that uses the term "Devil's cut" to describe how its whiskey is produced.
—BarrelProof (talk) 20:59, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Devil's cut

message: Perhaps that the ACTivation technology by Bespoken Spirits can be mentioned as an alternative.
Basically it uses extremely tiny pieces of wood and a device to char the wood, virtually eliminating maturing time and resulting in no angel's share at all.
See https://www.bespokenspirits.com/#technology
--Genetics4good (talk) 14:14, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Beverage maturing

message: بسیار خوب و مفید بود Shahrokh889 (talk) 04:18, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  بسیار عالی