Talk:List of hop varieties

Standardising info

What information do we want to include here? I reckon we want to include the following for each hop, with an optional comment, too:

• Name
• Origin
• Alpha
• Beta

Any thoughts on other info we might want to include, or how to incorporate it? -- Mark Chovain 04:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I can't see information on origin for all of the varieties, should that coloumn perhaps be called just information or details? Million_Moments (talk) 17:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

A word to the wise - if you want this page to stay, you'll have to add references indicating where you got the various percentages etc. from. Also, statements such as "Typical American citric pine hop with notable grapefruit and pineapple flavours." definately need to be backed up with documented evidence, otherwise it will fall foul of various important Wikipedia guidelines.... CultureDrone (talk) 11:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Great job on changing it to a table. I absolutely agree that the sourcing needs improvement. I didn't actually create this page, by the way - it was split from Hops so we could focus on these kind of things; but I just haven't had the time since :(.

For the record though, pages are rarely deleted for being unsourced. As long as the subject is notable (a quick Google search will show that), then the page should stay. Disputed claims on the other hand should be removed. I personally think most of the tasting notes should go, as they are subjective, and hard to back up. Most of the acid percentages are easily sourced through the USDA though - I'll add a blanket ref for now, and will look at doing them individually shortly. -- Mark Chovain 20:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Apologies - I should have read your edit summary more closely ! Re articles being deleted from lack of sources - very true, but they have been deleted for lack of sources if it looks like they're violating WP:OR - and those tasting notes seemed to push it into that area. :-) CultureDrone (talk) 07:14, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Beta and CoH stats

I'm going to get rid of the beta acid and cohumulone stats. These are not really defining characteristics like the alpha acid percentage, and can be gathered from other sources if anyone really needs them. I don't mind the beta acids going back in if anyone objects, but the CoH levels are just too detailed for such a list. -- Mark Chovain 00:14, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Henham variety

I've come across a reference to an old variety of hop called the Henham. Its name comes from the Henham family who were farmers in East Peckham, Kent in the C19th. Source is a leaflet by the Churches Conservation Trust about St Michael's church, East Peckham. Is this variety within the scope of the list? Mjroots (talk) 19:48, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Table vs. Sections

Last week, I came to this article and converted it from a regular table to a sortable one, which I thought was a nice change, because then you could (crudely) sort by alpha. Crudely, since I'm ignorant of the wikipedia format. It was nice to cluster the hops by their alpha rather than alphabetically. Anyway, since then SilkTork changed it to sections, for "Wikilinking" purposes. Although I'm not against Wikilinking, I don't like this new format.

I came to this page last week looking to see what hops were similar to Hallertauer/Tettnanger in terms of alpha (because I'm making a Munich Helles and I am doing research). Ideally (for me, and I expect I'm not alone) this would be a sortable table, where one could see similar alpha, beta, country of origin, etc, and compare similar hops.

I don't know but I suspect there is a better perspective for displaying this information. Ideas? 72.93.87.3 (talk) 19:06, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I have put in a simplified table - though I note that the Alpha acid column is not fully sortable - perhaps because it spreads across a range. The table needs attention - though there are a number of aspects of the article that need attention, so it's a question of which is the more important. The article is in need of sourcing - that is a priority. And there are some aspects of the article which appear to be more manual than encyclopedia - I am unclear of the encyclopedia value of naming "substitutes", though I can see the "how-to" appeal of it. I'd like to see this list develop in a robust manner to become a useful resource for the general reader, and to gently move it away from being a "how-to" resource for home-brewers. SilkTork *^YES! 00:37, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Cool! I believe there is a reference table in Dave Miller's Guide. I will try and source this over the weekend. I'll see if I can find Beta values, too.72.93.87.3 (talk) 22:26, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: table. Inconstitency for "Feux-Coeur Francais": value in table different from value in text. I don't know which one is correct Roland.flutet (talk) 05:16, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

hop variety

every person see this topic can help me to develop about the questions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.148.159.174 (talk) 03:55, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of hop varieties. 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/20130315043356/http://www.usahops.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=hop_info&pageID=9 to http://www.usahops.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=hop_info&pageID=9

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:02, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Faram programme

@CharlesFaram: These need other sources showing that other growers, seed sellers are giving you attention. Merely your own website links will not be enough. Invasive Spices (talk) 13 January 2022 (UTC)