User talk:Agne27/Archive 11

Welcome back!

Good to see you back on Wikipedia! ~Amatulić (talk) 07:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

By the way, I thought an experienced editor like you should have rollback rights, so I have granted rollback to your account. You may never need to use it, as it's intended only for quickly reverting obvious vandalism, including reverting sequential vandal edits from the same editor with one click. See WP:ROLLBACK for more information. You'll see an additional link "rollback" appear next to the "undo" link when you look at people's edits. Continue using "undo" if your revert requires an explanation. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:40, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, real life has given me a bit of a reprieve and the Wiki-itch is coming back. Trying to do a little gnome-work, obscure grape article creation, etc. Thanks for the rollback rights, I never really thought to ask for them since I don't do much vandal fighting but I guess if the need arises. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 00:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Ditto on the welcome back! A lot of odd grape articles in the last couple of days... The little I've done on variety articles recently has more been to add infoboxes and VIVC data, so now I have some more to have a go at. :-) Just out of curiosity - is it a pure coincidence that many of them were listed in User:Tomas_e/List of grape varieties without articles? And you seem to have the ambition to redirect all synonyms - phew! I guess it's a matter of taste, but I typically don't bother with odd synonyms that aren't linked from any articles, especially since overlapping synonyms are quite common. Tomas e (talk) 17:43, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Well mostly I'm going off of Jancis Robinson's book (which I used to update the List of grape variety article) but your page was a starting point.

As for synonyms, I think it is rather important for a couple reasons, most notably that it helps build the web and gives more potential for people to stumble across the page. But also I think redirecting synonyms 1.) help build up pages that link to the article that keeps it from being orphan or sparsely linked (mostly by DAB notices and disambig but there are often DOs, DOC pages that are linked by synonyms) 2.) The redirect influences google search results which means if someone is searching for some weird wine name they saw on a wine bottle or web page (more likely to happen with a foreign language user or European wine), they are more likely to be lead here. 3.) Redirects also show up on the "Did you mean?" search results on Wikipedia if someone is searching for a similar word. Even if someone is not looking for the grape, it can spark their curiosity enough to click on the link and who knows what happens from there? In the end, more eyes that fall on the page gives the article a better chance of someone wanting to do something more with that article. But, yes, it is rather tedious "gnometry" work but in some degrees it is rather fascinating because synonyms do give a hint of a grape's origins and history. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:02, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't thought about the search engine angle, but it's a good point. A full list of synonyms in the article should also result in Google hits, but it seems likely that an article title, i.e. web page title (even if it is redirected) is indexed differently by search engines, although I must confess an ignorance about how it actually works. Tomas e (talk) 11:31, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm not an expert in SEO stuff either, but you are correct in that a page title (as in a redirect) does have a higher "point value" than just listing the synonym in the article. From most search engine perspectives, a listing of synonyms are just more "words" in an article and while those words get some points for uniqueness (versus more common words like "wine", "grape", etc), it is still not likely to have visibility as what a redirect would offer. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 19:47, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Wachau

Hello! Good to see you are still are wino! I was wondering if you could contribute to the wine section in an article we are writing User:Nvvchar/Wachau. There is some info in the wine section but I was wondering if you could expand that paragraph a little and make it more resourceful?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:13, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, well typically the MO for significant wine regions is to create a separate article Wachau wine with a main article dab in the relevant section. So far your paragraph looks like a good summary but let me create the Wachau wine main article and I will see if anything is missing. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 19:52, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Santorini (wine)

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Hajji Firuz Tepe

Hi, I came across your DYK nom for Hajji Firuz Tepe and did some work on it to include more info on the actual site and the excavations that were carried out and also reorganized the article a little bit. The DYK info should still be intact, though. If I have time, I'll add some more info this week but it should be ok for the main page as it is now. -- Zoeperkoe (talk) 22:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Wow! Awesome work! It is very cool to have more archaeological details in the article since obviously all my sources were focused on the wine. Thank you so much for taking the time to do that. Looks great! It's stuff like this which makes Wikipedia great. :) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 01:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. -- Zoeperkoe (talk) 21:21, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh, btw, maybe you already know it, but since you seem to be very much into wine (history), you might be interested in this book. I was surprised that you didn't use it for the Hajji Firuz article, as this is written by one of the people involved in identifying the residues. I really liked reading it. -- Zoeperkoe (talk) 16:07, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Heh, the last few times I've been looking for it, it had been out of stock but I suspect I might finally nab McGovern's book for Christmas. :) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 18:08, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Wachau wine

Materialscientist (talk) 12:03, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Hajji Firuz Tepe

Materialscientist (talk) 06:03, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Dolchetto Cotta vineyard in Barbaresco zone.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Dolchetto Cotta vineyard in Barbaresco zone.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 02:37, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I tried to rescue this one, but it appears that the image has been deleted from Flickr, so it's probably best to let this one go. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:41, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, this one of the early uploads before I discovered flickr bot. I'm not going to sweat it. Thanks though for your efforts. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 05:42, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about the hassle - I just remembered I worked on getting a lot of your Flickr images on Commons a few years ago. Sorry we couldn't save this one. :( Kelly ^hi! 05:46, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh no hassle. I know the good work you do Kelly and you've always been very fair. Like I said, this was done before I discovered flickr bot and so I can't be too upset when the author deletes or changes the license. It happens. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 05:49, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Do not remove claims because of dead links

Hi! I have seen that you have removed a number of statements recently because they are sourced with dead links. This is wrong, you should not remove the statement. See e.g. WP:LINKROT. --Stefan ^talk 13:56, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm following WP:BRD (and thus wouldn't repeat my removal if I'm reverted) but I would hope that anyone who reverts would at least find a valid reference for the material. Unsourced or materials questionably source have always been fair game for deletion on Wikipedia. While I went through several dozen articles with dead links, I only removed the claims that were truly questionable without the reference and didn't have a quick replacement found and usually for a single claim. Articles with a dead link reference that sourced multiple lines I didn't touch but made a note to spend more time finding a replacement. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:18, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

My point was that you should not remove the text or the dead link ref, it is not unsourced, it just have a dead link now, we do not need references accessable on the net, just references. I am too busy to even revert you now and for sure to find and new references, but will try to revert you next year when I get time, my argument would be WP:LINKROT. See "Do not delete factual information solely because the URL to the source does not work any longer. WP:Verifiability does not require that all information be supported by a working link, nor does it require the source to be published on-line". Would you have a issue with that? --Stefan ^talk 15:37, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I suppose the keyword is "factual" and how likely something is factual and how much it needs verifiability. When I went through the deadlink articles, if the claim was relatively "bland" and likely true (such as the dead links that went to government reports on the establishment of regulations, etc), I left it. But if it was a more eye catching claim (such as this one from the Moldovan wine article that a separate editor already tagged as requiring a valid reference, I removed it with the hope that any editors who returns the information would return it with a valid reference (ala WP:BOP). Admittedly I put more faith in the policy WP:V than in the essay WP:LINKROT as I also put more emphasis on the reliable part when it comes to evaluating reliable sources. A dead link (especially those to questionable websites such as one I removed from Alternative wine closures), is not the same as a no longer published book because in the later case you at least have evidence that the source once existed while with a dead webpage the material might have never been there in the first place. Like I said, I have no problem being reverted but I would hope that any editor who reverts me would place a premium on having fully sourced, verifiable content attributed to reliable sources and not blindly replace a link that may have never even supported the text in the first place. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:20, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, I reverted two of what I think is bad (Canberra District wine region and Penfolds Grange), I have not added and new source, both on my watch list and one of them I have actually read the reference or another statement claiming that it is true when it was online (how can you say that it is not likely factual that grange have been considered the most highly rated wine by langton???). I see what you mean in most other cases, but I do not think you should have reverted claiming dead links, but I can understand why you reverted them so I let them stay. --Stefan ^talk 17:48, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

That's fine. I respect your judgement and I will leave those articles be. :) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:52, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Added 2 refs for the canberra one, the grange one I know is right, I will try to find a ref after the new year, have some champagne for me :-), happy new year!!! I sign of for the year, cu in 2011!!! --Stefan ^talk 17:57, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Will do! I have a Champagne Salon waiting for me on New Years :) Hope you have a great one and see you in January! Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:59, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Hum, nothing so nice for me! anyway, added a link [1] for grange. --Stefan ^talk 12:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Beaujolais Nouveau bottles.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Beaujolais Nouveau bottles.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 21:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Azerbaijani wine

Hi Agne27. Thanks for your input on the article. It looks perfect now! Tuscumbia (talk) 14:11, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Quick question for you Agne27. In the sentence Azerbaijan's long history of wine production was rediscovered at archaeological digs of settlements in Kültan, Galabaglar and Galajig where archaeologists discovered stone fermentation and storage vessels that included residue and grape seeds dating back to the second millennium BC, does the book make any reference to the raion of Azerbaijan the villages of Kültan, Galabaglar and Galajig are located in? Just trying to wikilink them. Tuscumbia (talk) 14:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

No unfortunately, just the villages. I did a Google search seeing if there was any alternative spellings that may be linkable and I couldn't find it. :( Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:23, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Wow, impressive stuff. Really great --NovaSkola (talk) 14:36, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks but huge credit goes to Tuscumbia for starting the article. Even though we want Wikipedia to be as comprehensive as it can when it comes to covering the world of wine, I must admit that I don't know when the Wine Project would have gotten around to writing an article on Azerbaijani wine. It's always helpful when editors contribute to sorely under-represented areas. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:23, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Agne. I found this additional source. Can you please see if anything relevant can be added to the Azerbaijani wine article from here [2]? Tuscumbia (talk) 21:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not familiar with this webpage. It looks to a self-publish site, like a blog, that we tend not to use on wine articles because their reliability is often not that strong on wine topics (often with a lot of apocryphal details). It has some interesting material but, admittedly, I'm hesitant to recommend using it for more than just an external link. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 22:51, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

OK. Were you able to find any reference to the districts that Kültan, Galabaglar and Galajig are located in? I really want to wikilink them. Tuscumbia (talk) 13:34, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Nothing beyond their mention in the Oxford Companion (Well there is this German website on wine that I suspect is also using the Oxford as a source). I strongly suspect this is a case of alternative spelling or the name of the village has change but I'm just not familiar enough with Azerbaijan or the language to sort that out. Do you think others at Wikipedia:WikiProject Azerbaijan may be able to shed some light? Worse case scenario, I don't think having a red link is bad. It is highly unlikely that the Oxford source is wrong, it is just probably using an older name that hasn't be redirected to the proper article but perhaps these are articles that truly haven't been written yet and in time they will be. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 19:25, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Limnio

The DYK project (nominate) 02:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Montepulciano (grape)

Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

User:Bethling/Sandbox

The best thing to do would be add fields you want modified with three sets of curly brackets ({{{ }}}). Name each field you want modified such as {{{user1| }}}, {{{new1| }}}, {{{stubs1| }}} and {{{photo1| }}}, {{{user2| }}}, {{{new2| }}}, {{{stubs2| }}} and {{{photo2| }}} etc.... Add some "if" statements so that only lines that are used appear - If there are only three users there would only be three lines and not a set of a dozen lines with empty fields ({{{1}}}, {{{2}}}, {{{3}}}...).

The user fields should be set up like this (I am using her code here):

{{#if:{{{user1|}}}| 
{{!}}- style='background-color:#D0D0FF;'
{{!}} scope="row"! style="background-color: #A5A5E0;border-color:#505050"| [[User:{{{User1|}}}]]
{{!}}{{{new1| }}} 
{{!}}{{{stubs1| }}} 
{{!}}{{{photo1| }}}
}}{{#if:{{{user2|}}}| 
{{!}}- style='background-color:#D0D0FF;'
{{!}} scope="row"! style="background-color: #A5A5E0;border-color:#505050"| [[User:{{{User2|}}}]]
{{!}}{{{new2| }}} 
{{!}}{{{stubs2| }}} 
{{!}}{{{photo2| }}}
}}{{#if:{{{user3|}}}| 
{{!}}- style='background-color:#D0D0FF;'
{{!}} scope="row"! style="background-color: #A5A5E0;border-color:#505050"| [[User:{{{User2|}}}]]
{{!}}{{{new3| }}} 
{{!}}{{{stubs3| }}} 
{{!}}{{{photo3| }}}
}}

Now what I have done here in the example replicates the first three lines of the template. The problem is that it may be incomplete and possibly erroneous as I haven't done this in quite a while. The person I have always gone to for help with these kinds of templates is User:Happy-melon who is phenomenal with wiki-code.

Once it was set up, move it to the template namespace ({{WID-2011}}) and call the template with the fields filled in. It would be filled out like this:

{{WID-2011
 | user1  = Agne27
 | new1   = 1
 | stubs1 = 2
 | photo1 = 3

 | user2  = Jerem43
 | new2   = 1
 | stubs2 = 2
 | photo2 = 3

 | user3  = Bethling
 | new3   = 1
 | stubs3 = 2
 | photo3 = 3
}}

I hope this helps to get you going. If you want I can test this and see if it works. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 08:14, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I would greatly appreciate you testing it. I started to fiddle with Beth's Sandbox and when I hit preview, it just looked all messed up. So obviously I'm not following it right. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 08:45, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Finished?

Is this what you are looking for:

Article Number	New Articles	Stubs Killed	Clean Up Photo Illustrated
Ex.	New Article	Stub Killed	Added Photo
Agne27 (talk)	1	2	3
Jerem43 (talk)	1	2	3
Bethling (talk)	1	2	3

I just realized this isn't quite right, but I am on track. I am off to bed now because it is too late in the AM. I will work on this more tomorrow.--Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 10:25, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

It's very close. You're definitely on track. I'd like users to be able to put the name of the article in the box and sometimes they will do more than one in a particular category (like 2 stubkills, etc). I really appreciate the time you're putting into this. Thank you Jeremy. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Added to project page

• Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wine#January_WP:WID2011-North_American_wines - I'm not sure what to do when an editor (like myself) does more than one article in a related category. I also seemed to have created an error in the user4 section :/ Agne^Cheese/^Wine 07:40, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Chateau Grand Traverse wines pictures

Here are a few. The market I was in had horrible lighting, so they're not fantastic. I will hopefully be able to take a drive (and a few more pictures) this weekend, but some plans have changed and I may not be able to. I promise that I will get some more (hopefully better) wine pictures and a few pictures of very snowy vineyards as soon as I can.

• 
• 
• 
• 

Feel free to use all or none; as I said, I hope to be in a market with better lighting at some point in the near future. Dana boomer (talk) 02:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Cool! They're very workable and I've updated the article with one of the pics. :) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 01:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Rosso Barletta DOC

Thanks from the DYK project and me Victuallers (talk) 09:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Agne27. You have new messages at Template_talk:Did_you_know#Brazo.
Message added 03:05, 8 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Burrowing Owl Image

Thanks for adding the image, I did search for Burrowing Owl Estate and Burrowing Own wine (no free usable results for either), but not Burrowing Owl Winery! Camw (talk) 04:52, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

No prob. Thanks for creating the article. Very well done. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 04:54, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Chateau Grand Traverse

The DYK project (nominate) 18:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Okanagan Valley (wine region)

The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Clarence Dillon/Clarendelle

Hello Agne! I had a look at your two PRODs, and also found a third related article Domaine Clarence Dillon (it was uncategorized and not tagged for any projects), which partially clarifies the relationship between these entities, because the name "Clarence Dillon" definitely rang a bell. Domaine Clarence Dillon is apparently the holding company of Haut-Brion and La Mission Haut-Brion, and Clarence Dillon Wines is the negociant arm of the group, of which Clarendelle is the main brand. So I guess in a sense it is to Haut-Brion and its owners what Mouton Cadet is to Mouton Rothschild and the Baroness Phillipine, although it's not been around for that long or reached quite the volume, and it seems to aim at a higher price point. However, this article indicates that the volume of the 2005 vintage was 750,000 bottles (with an increasing tendency), which makes it a rather big wine brand for being French, in particular at its price point. So I would consider it marginally notable on size/market share considerations. Since I think we're not been to good at covering the major brands or corporate structure of the wine industry (as opposed to individual producers), I'd be a bit hesitant to delete both (or all three) articles. One possibility would be to merge the Clarendelle article (minus the "super premium" terminology - gaah!) to the Clarence Dillon Wines article, with one or two references added. A more drastic move would be to merge both these to the Domaine Clarence Dillon article. Tomas e (talk) 20:31, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah, that does make more sense. I would have no problem with merging all of them to the Domaine Clarence Dillon article. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 20:53, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea how the talk pages work, so please forgive this "intrusion" into this one if it isn't appropriate. I respectfully disagree on the fusion of the Clarendelle article into the company page. The wines themselves are of equal or perhaps more interest than the company that produces them.

• Clarendelle wines are significant and notable enough to meet the general standards of Wikipedia as practiced in most fields I have observed.
• Because of their origin, the land and people producing them, they are unique.
• "Super premium wine brand" is an American wine industry term designating a wine selling for more than $15, not a superlative. An encyclopedia should use industry-wide terminology.

randulo —Preceding undated comment added 18:37, 19 January 2011 (UTC).

Hello. No, don't ever hesitate to make a note on another editors talk page or participate in a discussion. I see that you haven't had much experience editing Wikipedia wine article but typically we don't make separate articles for each wine brand, but rather keep all the relevant information together in the main article. It is of no advantage to the reader to have to click on multiple links to find info on wines from the same company. This includes second wine labels of notable wineries like the Alter Ego de Palmer stub that another editor had properly redirected to Chateau Palmer long ago. The few times Wikipedia bends from that convention is when the info on the product would overwhelm the parent article, which is certainly not the case here. I will restore the redirect but if you continue to disagree, I recommend looking for a wider consensus either on the article's talk page or perhaps ask other wine editors over at the Wine Project's talk page. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

If that's policy, it's understandable. The "advantage" I'd see of keeping separate articles would be this: now that Facebook and a lot of other sites suck in content based on a Wikipedia search, while I deplore this personally, it makes a community page populate with the right information. Thanks for your patience and thoughtful reply. randulo 09:10, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned article

Hello - I noticed that you removed the orphan tag from A. W. Baxter noting "not orphaned" in your edit summary. Technically the article is indeed still an orphan as it only contains two links from other articles, whereas an article with less than three incoming links is considered an orphan. I will not reapply the tag, but wanted to make sure you were aware that per WP:ORPHAN the article should have at least three incoming links prior to the tag being removed. --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 17:33, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh I thought there was a third article. I'll look into it. Thanks! Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

No worries - just wanted to make sure you were aware that three articles are typically preferred in case you were planning on reviewing a number of orphan-tagged articles. Cheers,--Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 17:40, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Nah, I was just doing a mass clean-up/tag removal spree of several wine articles last night with multiple windows opened. I had something in mind for the third article link that I just missed. I'll need to back track my thoughts to figure out what it was :P Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

How about Baxter (name)? --Jezebel'sPonyo^{bons mots} 17:58, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

That wasn't what I had in mind but it is perfect! Thanks! Agne^Cheese/^Wine 18:00, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Burrowing Owl Estate

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Your opinion

I was wondering if you could give me your thoughts on this. I was looking at the Heitz article and became tempted to build it into something substantially more, but I'd like to remove the awards section (as something we don't usually do around here), and from there try to end up with something fivefold. Would that be cool from a 5x DYK point of view? deMURGH ^talk 22:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK can be pretty picky about removing material and then counting the reduced figure for the five fold expansion (even if the stuff you removed was OR, POV, unsourced or other garbage). However, we are fortunate in that the awards section in Heitz is actually bullet pointed as a list so the only characters that technically "count" is from the prose in the line and the two lines introducing the awards section. Using the DYK prosesize script, it looks like Heitz is currently at 736 B (125 words) "readable prose size" so you would only need to expand it to around 3700 prose characters for the expansion. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 22:40, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah so? That seems a pretty surmountable job. I should easily have the RS for it. Thanks. deMURGH ^talk 22:53, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award.
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

♠TomasBat 02:12, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Wine AVA descriptions

I hope you're having a good week.

I did notice that you removed a couple of references to the education section of my website, which in my opinion are more valid than the ones you let stand. Appellation America is now subscriber only content, so I don't understand why those are being left when the Wiki's are being sent to what amounts to a sales page.

I'm taking a lot of time and effort speaking with both vineyard owners and winemakers to craft realistic and understandable education sections on my site. I understand if you don't feel there should be any commercial links, but it's simply not fair to leave Appellation America's links there as well as companies which are affiliates of mine. Heck, if you don't want my wine club listed-that's fine, but at least I work in the industry and am honestly trying to create quality content. Those guys are simply internet marketers.

If you have further questions-let's chat (mark@uncorkedventures.com)

I really do believe in Wikipedia and hope we can figure out a quality level which warrants a link. I want to help with the wine section, both on my own site as well as here.

Thanks for the time and understanding! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ace2110 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! You may want to familiarize yourself with some important Wikipedia policies like Wikipedia:Verifiability, which is the standard for all content. Of particular interest is the WP:PAYWALL section which says that just because a reference is subscription base, doesn't mean it is not valid. Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources talks about what type of sources are reliable, valid sources that can be used in articles. Appellation America provided extensively researched and documented info on American wine regions and is an undoubtedly reliable source and is such highly appropriate to use in AVA articles. Two more policies you should review would be Wikipedia:External links and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. While you are certainly welcomed to contribute to Wikipedia (and WP:WINE could always use a few good winos on our many wine articles), it just would not be appropriate to add your own links to your commercial business. It would be a better route to make a comment on the talk page (or even the Wine Project's talk page) suggesting any good info that your site has and ask that a neutral, 3rd party editor take a look and see if it merits inclusion in the article. I hope this explains my removal of your links and helps out. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 20:54, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

It does make sense and I'm happy to send my stuff at a time when it is likely to be ready for an independent 3rd party to approve it. I do understand the conflict of interest argument, but I hope you can understand my frustration when you're removing links to my wine club and leaving blatant internet marketing links to affiliates there. There has to be a fair method here for all involved when it comes to commercial sites.

I don't think I ever said Appelation America wasn't a valid source, it certainly is. From a user standpoint though, I do wonder about the value of a resource which is only subscription only (have you ever subscribed yourself?). I wonder if you might be surprised about what's behind the velvet rope in some regards. AVA's shouldn't be as big of an issue as they've become on here.

Lastly, as far as links to commercial businesses. I think we both know that happens literally millions of times per day on this site. I've read through every terms of service and etiquette thing I can find here and nothing says a business can't have an education section which receives a link. Heck, Appeliation America is basically being allowed to use Wikipedia as a pre-sell for their subscription service.

One quick question-is creating individual winery pages something which is on the to-do list?

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I do appreciate it and hope that there are ways for me to contribute both in terms of the resources I'm creating, but also those I find on my own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ace2110 (talk • contribs) 22:09, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

I totally support you removing the remaining the external links on wine clubs. Truth be told, I wasn't too keen on keeping them and probably would have gone back later and removed them after I thought about it more. To answer your question, yes, I do subscribe to AA and also subscribe to Jancis Robinson's Purple Pages, Wine Spectator's subscriber content and a few enology journals. An online subscription is really no different than a magazine subscription and that means that the material is easily verifiable, even if it isn't free. Are links to Wine Spectator articles or any other magazine article a "pre-sell" for their magazine? As for your links, you're right. It does happen all the time but we try our best to remove them when we see them. That said, I do have to apologize for my snarky edit summary when I first removed your links. I was overly negative and suspicious of your motives and I was wrong. That is part of the by product from having to deal with so many spam links and vanity articles and it is unfortunate when we end up biting good faith contributors. With your last question, we do encourage the creation of winery articles but the winery does need to meet Wikipedia's notability threshold which basically means that there is enough independent, reliable sources that have wrote about the winery in a non-trivial fashion (i.e. more than just WP:WINEGUIDEs and wine reviews). The project page WP:WINERY has some pointers. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 00:33, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Grenache

Hi, Agne27!

I've seen you've removed a "citation needed" about the possible Sardinian origin of Grenache, saying that it is already cited. I don't manage to see the citation. Could you please tell me where it is?

Thank you! -- Imalbornoz (talk) 14:10, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, as I noted in my edit summary with (Oxford) the footnote that follows the text at the end of the paragraph (currently footnote #2) which is J. Robinson (ed) "The Oxford Companion to Wine" Third Edition pg 297-298, 333-334 Oxford University Press 2006 ISBN 0-19-860990-6. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 20:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I didn't know what you meant with Oxford (if I were a real expert I should have known it..., but I must admit I'm just starting...) I had seen that the generally accepted theory was that Grenache (Garnacha) was of Aragonese origin. Now I have tried to look up Robinson's text in Google Books, but haven't been able to. On the other hand, I have seen several sources saying something on the line of "Some have claimed the theory that the true birthplace of grenache is Sardinia, and that Aragonian conquerors brought the grape home from there. The common belief, however, is that grenache was brought to Sardinia during the period of Aragon rule in the 14th and 15th centuries." Would you know if Robinson's cite is along these lines (i.e.: that this is a minority theory?) or is it that both are generally accepted theories?

Thank you very much for your answer. -- Imalbornoz (talk) 14:58, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem. The wording of that section hasn't changed too much since I originally wrote the history text with the Oxford cite. It essentially follows the same thought that is probably Aragonese but the Italians/Sardinians have their alternate theory which was worth mentioning. I'll quote for you the text straight from the Oxford Companion (pg 333) below. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 02:29, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

“ As Garnacha, it probably originated in Spain in the northern province of Aragon before colonizing extensive vineyard land both north and south of the Pyrenees, notability in Roussillon, which was ruled by Spain, and more particularly by the kingdom of Aragon, for four centuries until 1659.

Grenache is undoubtedly, however, same grape variety as Sardegna's Cannonau, which the Sardinians claim as their own, advancing the theory that the variety made its way from the island off Italy (where it is also known as Granaccia and Tocai Rosso) to Spain when Sardegna was under Aragon rule from 1297 to 1713.

”

Thank you, it's great to have direct access to the sources. Looking at that source (and others I've come across), I think the text could be made a bit more accurate (from the outside, the article now looks a little as if both theories were equally accepted, but all sources seem to support that the Aragonese origin is actually much more generally accepted). Would you mind if I give it a try? Thank you very much. -- Imalbornoz (talk) 14:17, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Yes, feel free to edit the article. The only thing I'd ask you to be mindful of is that if you add any new information, be sure to source it. But as I've seen from your previous edits that shouldn't be a problem. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 23:28, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Boushey Vineyard

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Second opinion on Thomcord (grape)

Hello, I did a GAR on this article and would like some one else to take a quick look in on my review. The article is well written, but I want to make sure I am not just giving away a GA rating. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 09:09, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Heh, I'm really not the best person to ask about GA stuff since I don't have the most favorable view of that project. :P But I will take a general look for you and Visionholder. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 02:16, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Cardinals-Cubs rivalry needs work

Hi. I saw you had a lot to say about the article. I don't see any of the history mentioned in the rivalry and as a baseball fan was quite disappointed. All of the Yankees rivalry articles (Red Sox, Mets, Dodgers, Giants, Subway Series) have extensive facts and timelines. Heck, the Dodgers-Giants article, which I am not a fan of content wise, is infinitely better. Maybe you and some other people can collaborate and work on it? Just a thought. Arnabdas (talk) 18:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Well its been a long time since I worked on that article (and truth be told, it is not even on my watchlist anymore). I really don't have any good reliable sources to use so I don't think I'll be able to add the type of content you're interested in. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 02:14, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors

I saw the quality of your contributions at DYK and clicked on over to your user page and was pretty impressed. Would you be interested in helping with the WP:Online_Ambassadors program? It's really a great opportunity to help university students become Wikipedia contributers. I hope you apply to become an ambassador, Sadads (talk) 16:11, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the offer. It is something I'll consider to see if I can fulfill the time commitment. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 18:27, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Catawba (grape)

Hi. I reviewed your hook at T:TDYK and all looks good, except that you should re-format the dates in that article to remove ordinals (for example, "January 3" instead of "January 3rd"). Other than that, cheers and good work. — KV5 • Talk • 00:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Appreciate your time. I'll take a look when I get a chance. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 00:37, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Hermann AVA

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 06:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Prods

If a one-liner article truly and obviously doesn't meet criteria for inclusion, such as White Truck (wine) (which I have just deleted per WP:SPEEDY#A7), feel free to propose it for speedy deletion. In this case {{db-corp}} would have worked, since the organization that makes the wine doesn't appear notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia either. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:28, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Ah, I'll keep that in mind. Thanks! Agne^Cheese/^Wine 03:18, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Cristom Vineyards

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Stag's Leap Wine Cellars DYK Suggestion?

Hi Agne,

Thanks for a few DYK submissions on my behalf recently. I was hoping you might be able to help with a suggestion for a hook for this article that was just expanded today please. Prose went from 1353 to 7597 so I think it should be fine eligibility wise. I suppose something relating to the Judgment of Paris result would be most interesting, but I'm drawing a blank as to what would have the most impact.

Sorry that things have gone quiet on the Okanagan Valley desert issue, things don't seem to be any clearer now, Skookum seems willing to compromise, but now there are other editors that don't think it should be included. Do you still want to pursue it? I'm willing to continue to support compromise wording discussions, but I think we need to conclude it as quickly as possible with whatever wording is not going to cause more pages of drama. Camw (talk) 04:52, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually I thought a period of quiet was somewhat helpful for quelling the drama. It seems that the other editors want the order of the sentence somehow reversed, which seems doable, but I'm not sure which referencing would be the best for it. As for Stag's Leap, I'll take a look at the article and see if something pops out. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 18:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

So what do you think of this? If you're okay with it, I'll go ahead and nominate it for it you. It's a shame there isn't a free use picture to use of the actual bottle. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 19:04, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

• ... that a bottle of 1973 Stag's Leap Wine Cellars Cabernet Sauvignon is kept at the Smithsonian to commemorate its role in American wine history for winning the 1976 Judgment of Paris wine tasting?

That sounds good and seems interesting thank you. If you would like to nominate it that would be alright thanks, I do have a reviewed DYK credit that I can use to self-nom as well if needed - but since you came up with the hook you should get to propose it if you want to! Camw (talk) 23:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah. Save your credit. I'm sure you'll have an opportunity to use it soon. Besides, I can use this to make a non-disruptive point. :P Agne^Cheese/^Wine 03:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that, it has been a good month for Wine DYKs, surely the most for a while? One question, with the needs-photo tagging you've been doing, does that indicate that you looked for a free photo and couldn't find one, or just that you checked the article and noticed it needs a photo? No problem either way, but don't want to duplicate efforts looking for photos if that is a step you have already taken when tagging. Camw (talk) 04:57, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Right now it is just to populate the "Needs Photo category" which I periodically scan flickr and other sources for. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 04:58, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Catawba (grape)

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Mikulovská wine

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:04, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

French wine articles

Hello Agne, just a quick note to say I noticed your "Hello from the English Wikipedia!" text over at frwiki. A good idea since they have very good coverage of French AOCs, but I have a bit of mixed feelings about most of their long articles. They contain a lot of material which is a bit POVish (vintage ratings, tasting descriptors using "value words") and uses language which is to some extent is floral rather than encyclopedic, i.e., a bit wine guide-like in appearance. Apparently frwiki has a higher tolerance for this than enwiki or dewiki, at least for wine-related articles. (And admittedly, my French is quite weak, and mostly helps me to avoid some pitfalls when using Google Translate.) When such articles on occasion have been translated verbatim fro fr to en by editors unused to enwiki wine articles, they have required quite a lot of cleanup and pruning. Also, there is a lot of repetition between some sets of AOCs articles in frwiki, with long sections on winemaking practices which tend to vary from region to region rather than from AOC to AOC within a region. Of course, a translation from frwiki is a lot better than a redlink or a short stub, but I'm worried that if someone would embark on translating several whole articles, we would have to significantly shorten or even delete some sections to keep the articles to enwiki standards. Regards, Tomas e (talk) 20:21, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Hmm...I did notice some of these issues with articles like Quincy AOC. I also moved several of the tables to the talk pages for later verification and conversion into infobox. However, I do think something is better than nothing and I think a fair amount could be gained in a sharing of expertize between the wikis. And perhaps this time the French editors would be willing to work with us, collaboratively, on creating article more along the en wiki standards and we could avoid some of these "after the fact" problems? I do wish I paid more attention to French class in school. :P Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Factual error on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_wine.

Hi there

This is the first time I've contributed anything to wiki, and am probably not doing it through the right forum, but I keep getting lost, and you seem to be approachable and knowledgeable.

I've picked up an error on this page :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_African_wine.

This sentence, in the first paragraph of 'History' is incorrect: "The first harvest and crushing took place on April 6, 1652."

Firstly, that is the date that Jan van Riebeeck landed at the Cape, and secondly, the start of the article states: "South African wine has a history dating back to 1659". I don't know what the correct date is though, so I'm not much use there!

41.132.117.168 (talk) 13:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Agne seems to be away, so I hope she doesn't mind if I answer. I checked the source (Oxford Companion to Wine 3rd Edition), and it says that the first harvest was 7 years after landing. So I believe the 1659 date is correct, and I have amended the History section to reflect it. Thanks for pointing it out! Camw (talk) 06:41, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Camw. I had wisdom tooth extraction a couple days ago and between the pain and the meds I haven't felt like doing much Wiki-work. I suspect I just made a typo between 1652 and 1659 so I appreciate both the anon IP and you stepping in to clean that up. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 18:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I had two of mine taken out last year, so I know how you feel! Good luck on a quick recovery. Camw (talk) 00:35, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

5-5-5 Improvement Drive

I was so impressed with your '5-5-5 Improvement Drive' for the Wine WikiProject, I initiated a '5-5-5 Improvement Drive' at the Novels WikiProject. The results can be seen here Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Collaboration. --maclean (talk) 06:08, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Very cool! I wish you guys the best of luck! Agne^Cheese/^Wine 18:23, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Stag's Leap Wine Cellars

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for John Mohammed Butt

Thank you for pointing out that the BBC ref [FN#1] supports the 1866 foundation date.. I had overlooked that. The troublesome FN#4 was only added to address the previous reviewer's concern that this date was unsupported - and I have now removed it completely, as I agree it adds nothing to the article.. I have also removed a duplicated version of FN#1. As for the graduation date of 1984 - that is supported by FN#2 and I have now made that clearer. Thanks again for your input. Josephus (talk) 23:30, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Santorini

Hey there - I tried to contact you via Twitter, but it looks like you haven't been on in a while... I hope I'm writing you a message the correct way. Anyway, I saw you changed the information I added to the Santorini page and I noticed you've done a great deal of work with the page. I am the PR manager for digital media for the Wines from Santorini and there are a couple things that I think we should discuss and work together to edit that are inaccurate and/or slightly skewed.

Please email me as constance_Chamberlain@comcast.net and we can figure out who will do the edits.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by VinoCC (talk • contribs) 21:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Ghe best place to have this discussion would actually be the Talk:Santorini (wine) page so that other interested editors can participate in the discussion and everything is transparent. Beforehand, I do encourage you to read up on some important Wikipedia policies that will be very relevant to the discussion. First is our Wikipedia:Conflict of interest page. I certainly appreciate your honesty in identifying your interest and you are, of course, welcome to assist in improving Wikipedia's content but the COI page will give you a good idea on what types of involvement are most appropriate in relation to articles that you have a vested interest in their content. The other important pages are our guidelines on citing reliable sources for any content added so that they can be verified by readers and other editors. One of the reasons why I reverted your previous edit was that you deleted all the article's references and added new content that wasn't attributed to any independent, third party reliable sources. Now you mention that some of the information in the article may have been inaccurate or skewed. This is the exact type of information that should be discussed on the article's talk page so we can see what the reliable sources say and how best to present the information in the most WP:NPOV manner. I hope this helps and again, let's start a discussion on the Talk:Santorini (wine) page and see what we can do. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 22:49, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

All set - first topic for discussion is up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VinoCC (talk • contribs) 19:20, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token 0afa5efb00e61a7fa036775f966386ac

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

DYK for Len de l'El

Orlady (talk) 00:04, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Poulsard

Orlady (talk) 12:03, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Nielluccio

MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 23:32, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Domaine Raveneau

Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 06:05, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Fer

Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

March 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive a week away

WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of March. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 50. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, we hope we can see you in March. MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 00:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Helium.com pending blacklisting

I just wanted to let you know: The site helium.com is being prepared for blacklisting. See discussion at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#helium.com. I mention it because it seems you're relying on this site for sources in your sub-page User:Agne27/Top importance wine article comparisons.

Basically helium.com consists of self-published works whose authors get paid when their articles are linked to, and as such they encourage linkspamming on Wikipedia. In cleaning up the links to this site, I noticed your page User:Agne27/Top importance wine article comparisons has a bunch of them, so don't be surprised if you get bounced if you try to use any of those links in the main article space. When the site does become blacklisted, individual pages, if judged to meet WP:RS criteria, can be whitelisted at MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist‎. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:11, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Shawnee Hills

Hi. I agree with your approach, first attempting a merger and then collecting consensus at WP:Articles for deletion/Shawnee Hills Wine Trail. I appreciate your continued engagement with Omnigraph at User talk:Omnigraph#Some friendly advice.

I added {{Copied}} above your note at Talk:Shawnee Hills AVA#Attribution note. That template is preferred because we can track it through categorization and transclusions. If you have any issues or comments, feel free to leave feedback at Template talk:Copied#The template is too difficult to use. Thanks. Flatscan (talk) 05:03, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I just recently learned about the copied-Template and will use it more in the future. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Tibouren

The DYK project (nominate) 18:03, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Agne27. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 06:30, 1 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

galets roulés

Hi Agne! I'm not sure that redlinking galets roulés is strictly necessary. All they are, are just fairly smooth rounded stones, like potato shaped pebbles, from the size of an egg to a fist or a bit bigger (I have them on my own vineyards). I don't think a Wikipedia article could be much more than a dic def. Perhaps a close up photo of some, to place on wine articles could be the answer - if we don't have one already on a wine article somewhere. What do you think? --Kudpung (talk) 11:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC) PS: see [3], and Pebble --Kudpung (talk) 11:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC) PPS: (sorry about the mess of addenda) - or even just linking to 'Pebble'.--Kudpung (talk) 11:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

I was using a generic edit summary in my autosave so I wasn't being 100% clear in my plans. I was more thinking of eventually creating a redirect to maybe Vineyard soils or possibly another article rather than new article per se. I figure there is enough content and reliable sources to describe what they are and describe their particular association with CdP, etc. Considering that it is a term that comes up often, I figure we need a link somewhere for readers who are curious about the term. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 14:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Vineyard soils might not be apt. It looks as if the article is about the soil itself. In the CdR region for example, we have many different soil types, and we sometimes import truckloads of the pebbles from other areas for our own fields. There's an interesting articles at fr.Wiki that actually has a photo of a Châteaunef vinyard's galets roulés. Perhaps, if we don't have a corresponding article in en.Wiki, I could translate it. Kudpung (talk) 14:48, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, me again. I see we already have the image on our article - maybe I put it there myself. BTW, translating the fr.Wiki article would be a headache, the fr.Wiki does not exercise the same demands for sources as we do, and the article is practically unsourced. Maybe just add this image to all appropriate wine articles with a suitable caption.Kudpung (talk) 14:57, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I see your point about the Vineyard soils article. I suppose we could add a paragraph to the CdP article, unless you have another idea? I just think there should be a place somewhere that offers some description when someone searches for the term. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 14:12, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll find a solution for this - at least for all the concerned Rhône wine articles, but it will be a generic one, so when I come up with something, perhaps you could add it using AWB - I can't do it because I use a Mac. It won't be for a while though because I've just been given a bucket and a mop today and I need to figure out all the new buttons ;) Kudpung (talk) 14:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem and congrats! Agne^Cheese/^Wine 22:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Anne Sharp DYK nomination

Hi Agne27, I've dropped you a note at T:TDYK regarding the offline source; I was able to verify it using amazon's Look Inside! function. It looks okay; Sharpe is listed in the cast list as playing one of the "tiresome village children". :) --JN466 22:43, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Domaine Jean-Luc Colombo

Gatoclass (talk) 10:03, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Camw's talk page

Hello, I wanted to let you know that I made some remarks about our recent disagreement on Camw's talk page. He had made a remark at the Falesco AfD and then removed it some time later. I hope that we can collaborate and agree on some wine articles in the future. I wish you well. Cullen328 (talk) 15:56, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Est! Est!! Est!!!

Well done, Agne! This is interesting stuff. There's a reference available on Google Books going back to 1826. I figured it was a 20th century gimmick but there is some real history behind this Falesco label. Cullen328 (talk) 08:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Marcel Deiss

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:03, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Château Fortia

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK review

Rest assured, I do not mean my comments at Wikipedia talk:Did you know as a criticism of you. I tried to clarify here: [4]. In fact, I think that you certainly acted appropriately in this case. Qrsdogg (talk) 06:37, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

It's alright. I know tone doesn't convey well online. I appreciate the note. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 08:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Cristom Vineyards

Hello,

As agreed, I have expanded the Falesco article. Now that a few days have gone by, I have posted some comments on the talk page for Cristom Vineyards regarding my concerns about the reliability of some of the sources. I would appreciate your input. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 01:53, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Est! Est!! Est!!! di Montefiascone

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:46, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Brachetto d'Acqui

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Old Mission Peninsula AVA

Greetings! I came across your edit which added the text "The following year he expanded to 55-acre of grapevines which was s first large-scale planting of Vitis vinifera. Should it read "...which was the first large-scale planting..."? --Thomprod (talk) 18:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that was a typo. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 20:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)