Talk:Rogue Beard Beer

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Klbrain in topic Merger proposal

Additional sources edit

More sources that could be included:

  • Jessica Smith (September 18, 2013), "Powder Keg: Beer and Beards", Summit Daily, Summit County, Colorado
  • Nicole Doll (September 25, 2012), New Oregon ale made from brewmaster's beard, Portland, Oregon: KPTV
  • Cameron Simick (May 19, 2014), "Bull Testicles, Roadkill & 19 More Beers Flavors You Won't Believe Exist", Foodbeast
  • Graham Averill (September 12, 2014), "Strange Brew: 8 Really Weird Beers", Paste
  • Ed Stansel (September 26, 2013), "Beard Beer, brewed with yeast from brewmaster's beard, among odd brews", Florida Times-Union
These are now either in the article references, or in Further reading. — Brianhe (talk) 03:32, 7 April 2015 (UTC)Reply


Congratulations edit

Congratulations on making it to today's listing on the "Did You Know..." section of Wikipedia Main Page. The process of making it the listing takes a bit of effort and involves the quick cooperation of many editors. All involved deserve recognition, appreciation, thanks and applause.

Best Regards,
  Bfpage |leave a message  13:08, 7 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Merger proposal edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
To not merge on the grounds of independent notability, with articles linked in Wikipedia:Summary style. Klbrain (talk) 09:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

I propose merging Rogue Beard Beer into Rogue Ales. The Beard Beer appears to meet the general notability guidelines to be mentioned on Wikipedia, but I feel that the content should be with the parent article. Faceless Enemy (talk) 03:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

OK. Why do you feel it should be with the parent article? FWIW, Wikipedia:Summary style is the main set of guidelines for this issue. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 04:51, 22 April 2019 (UTC)Reply
This article doesn't seem to be large enough to stand on its own, and given the size of the main article there doesn't seem to be any reason to split them out for readability. Faceless Enemy (talk) 02:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose. "This article doesn't seem to be large enough to stand on its own" is puzzling. It does stand on its own and was community recognized as a proper article, in fact a WP:DYK. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.