Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beer/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

List of breweries in Illinois

There's currently a discussion about whether List of breweries in Illinois should list all the breweries in the state, or just a few of them. Interested editors are encouraged to participate, at Talk:List of breweries in Illinois#Notability, and links. Thanks. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 16:04, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Help with attempted deletion of brewing related article

Hello everyone. I'm a microbrewer from Luton, England who has been working on the article BeerXML. Although there is no doubt that the topic meeds notabilty standards, ther are two users who have been trying to delete it since 5 minutes after its creation

Neither seems to have any knowledge of or interest in beer and brewing and while they are entitled to their opinion it would help if Wikipedians familiar with the subject of brewing and beer would express their opnions (after looking at the article) Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/BeerXML The topic there is whether the notability requirements have been met, rather than whether the article needs improvement (which I'm sure it does).

I'd really appreciate contributions to the article itself (and its talk page) as its lonely being the only contributor!

I think its really important that one or two people don't have the sole opinion on whether articles are deleted and hope you can help save this article about beer and brewing. - Thanks Devils In Skirts! (talk) 16:43, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

I haven't looked into the matter to assess the notability, however it's not good form to round up supporters in an AfD discussion per Wikipedia:Canvassing, and - per Wikipedia:No personal attacks - we comment on the content not the contributor, so "Neither seems to have any knowledge of or interest in beer and brewing" is not a relevant comment and could be seen as an attempt to belittle them. Wikipedia procedural and behavioral rules are quite complex - most people will make mistakes at some point, so no worries; just a heads up on what not to do in future. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 19:50, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

This isn't canvassing, in my view. Canvassing (or rather how not to do it) in a nutshell: "When notifying other editors of discussions, keep the number of notifications small, keep the message text neutral, and don't preselect recipients according to their established opinions." So that would be something like, "I'll post on the talk pages of editors X, Y, and Z, I've seen that they always favor keeping articles like this one." But in this case Devils In Skirts is notifying the WikiProject, or one of them, that would be interested in the article, which is fine, although I agree with your other remarks. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 20:22, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Looking over it again, I agree. PrivateWiddle is asking for opinions rather than simply support in an AfD. I was misled by the negative personal comments. It looks like the article was listed for AfD while still under construction, so I do understand some of the frustration. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 14:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I've marked the article BeerXML as class B on the quality scale as its reasonably complete and structured but I don't think it meriys a higher rating as it could do with some TLC from contributors who are more well-versed in the technicalities. If you think the assessment is wrong or would like to help with the article please head over to BeerXML, its talk page and as mentioned above, help with the Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/BeerXML deletion problem would be of great help Devils In Skirts! (talk) 20:32, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

As the article is a series of notes, I've marked it as start class. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 19:50, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Popular pages tool update

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 04:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Hogsback Brewing Company

Dear beer enthusiasts: Here's an old abandoned Afc submission. Is this a notable beer brand? There seem to be quite a few references available. Should the article be kept and improved? —Anne Delong (talk) 18:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

There are over 12,000 breweries in the world, 122 active breweries in Ontario, and 13 in Ottawa itself. The brewery does exist, but there is nothing notable about it. Best advice for such ordinary businesses is to mention them in the nearest available parent article per WP:Breweries and WP:LOCAL. An appropriate start would be a mention in Ottawa#Economy, gathering together information about the other breweries and the general beer scene. Useful resources: [1], [2], [3], [4]. Given there are so many breweries in Ottawa, the ones to mention by name would be the most notable, perhaps Hogsback, perhaps Kichesippi, and/or the one to open first. If there's enough sourced material, then a sub-article could be created: Breweries in Ottawa, and if then there is enough material on any one brewery, that could be split off into a standalone. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:17, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to reply, and for the brewery statistics. Since there are so many breweries, I assume that in order to be notable a brand of beer would have to attract substantial press coverage outside of the local area in which it's brewed. While I might have spent some time fixing up an article about this one business, a wider article about the brewing industry might better be done by someone who actually drinks beer.... —Anne Delong (talk) 13:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Microbreweries

Talking of microbreweries. Does anybody agree that its time to start splitting Category:Microbreweries into Category:Microbreweries by country etc. ? I don't mind doing some work on this. --Aspro (talk) 20:45, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

No. I don't think we should have a microbreweries category at all, let alone expand it. The definition of microbreweries (or craft breweries as they are now called) is vague; taking the consensus of sources, it applies to 99.9% of breweries in the world. Indeed, it applies to every brewery that is not one of the big ten. What we should have is categories for Breweries, and then one for the very big. The Microbreweries category is subjective, misleading, and unhelpful. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 08:24, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Good answer. That sums the situation up. As this cat is almost a 100% overlap of the Breweries cats, I think for that reason alone, a request on Wikipedia:Categories for discussion to have Micro' cat merged into the Breweries cat or deleted would go through unopposed. I think they would agree to, that the article List of microbreweries should be deleted. A note on the main category about the need to discuss the creation of any new cats on this talk page first, would also help. The really big brewers might be better represented in a new article. Being few in number they could be placed in a 'Sortable table' so that the reader can choose to view them alphabetical or by barrellage or turnover etc. Yet again 'big' would have to be defined and limits set, to prevent a downward creep of including smaller and smaller 'big' breweries or we will end up in the same situation but in reverse.--Aspro (talk) 10:53, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that makes sense. When the Microbreweries cat was created there was some opposition, but the consensus was to keep it. That was a good few years ago, though, so opinion might have changed. All the breweries which are in the cat are almost certainly American, so it's also a distorted categorisation. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 12:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

• This cat is now proposed for Merge. Categories for discussion/Log/2014 April 2--Aspro (talk) 15:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
• List of microbreweries now up on AfD:Microbreweries--Aspro (talk) 17:41, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

@Aspro: I'm looking at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of microbreweries, and the only reason you gave there for this list to be deleted was "overcatigration", which I'm taking to mean over-categorization. Was that intentional? I would think you'd want a more thorough explanation than that on the actual AfD listing. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 22:46, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I had presumed that other editors would have realized that I was referring to Mostly overlapping categories without spelling it out. This article also overlaps List of breweries in the United States. Hopefully, I have now made this clear on the AfD. I' am not suggesting which side you should take but I would appreciate your input for a consensus.--Aspro (talk) 21:27, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

The microbrewery cat has been removed from articles and upmerged perWikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_2#Category:Microbreweries. As the consensus was that the term is subjective and vague, the use of microbrewery as a neutral and clearly understood identifier in the lead is insecure, so is gradually being replaced by the neutral brewery. The size, brewing style, and marketing strategy of the company can be described in the body of the article, where the use of the term "microbrewery" (if appropriate for that brewery) can be explained in context (the term varies depending on usage, date, and culture).

{{Infobox brewery}} should be replaced per Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/templates by {{Infobox company}} to ensure consistency across Wikipedia for readers and editors. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 08:13, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

What notability is there for beer?

I created the artcle Alberget 4A, and it was almost immediately tagged for lack of notability. How should the article be developed to show notability for this particular beer mark? what does it take to show notability? Are there any guidelines? Bandy boy (talk) 06:35, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

See WP:Beer brands, WP:Breweries, WP:PRODUCT, and WP:GNG for some guidance. As each case is slightly different, and interpretations of guidelines can vary, there will be occasional disagreements on which beer brands are notable. As a general guide, most brands can be discussed within the brewery article - however, there are times when a particular beer brand may be more notable than the brewery which makes it, which means the brewery should be discussed within the beer brand article. Anyway, if someone feels a brand is notable enough, and has independent reliable sources which show notability (not just that the brand exists, such as a listing on a beer database or promotion by the brand owner, but that a reliable source has spoken in some depth about the brand - such as Michael Jackson in one of his books), then they can start an article. If someone disagree they can propose the article for merging or deletion, and then a discussion happens in which a consensus is arrived at. I hope that helps. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 08:58, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

I've speedy deleted the article as there is no notability for the brand. The article was purely promotional. It is worth noting that a similar article was also speedy deleted on the Swedish Wikipedia in December 2013. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:07, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

On what basis do you consider the brand not to have notability? The article is not meant to be promotional. There is a similar article on Swedish Wikipedia at present. There is no reason to speedily delete an article just because you personally think that it has no notability. Start a discussion about it instead. Bandy boy (talk) 09:48, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

The article sv:Alberget 4A which was deleted, was not about the beer. Bandy boy (talk) 09:52, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Off Color Brewing

Greetings all. As Off Color has now been in operation and gaining momentum for a little over a year here in Chicago, it seemed appropriate to start a new article for them -- particularly given the pedigree of co-founder John Laffler's unique previous position as a developer of Goose Island's barrel-aged beers, as well as Off Color's MO to resurrect beer styles that have largely not been seen in roughly 500 years. Anyone in the Chicago area that has picked up a six pack from Binny's (or wherever you prefer to buy your beer) knows Off Color is one of the brightest new stars in the Midwestern brewery seen. I'm still working on the article, but by all means, feel free to add on and/or edit what's already there.Ryecatcher773 (talk) 22:30, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Fort_Pitt_Brewing_Company

This AfC draft is about a historic brewing company which is being reopened. Is this notable? Any collaborators to reduce the promotional aspects? Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 12:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Having changes show up in the watchlist?

I've been watching the watchlist, looking for spam, vandalism, and making changes here and there. I've noticed, though, that some beer-related pages don't show up in that watchlist. Changes to the List_of_breweries_in_Alaska, for example, don't show up. Is there a magic trick to make sure that beer-related pages fall under the scope of the watchlist? Prof. Mc (talk) 12:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Articles which are not tagged with {{WikiProject Beer}} will not show up on the transcluded watchlist; List_of_breweries_in_Alaska is not tagged, though it should be. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 07:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

That's what I though it was, but I'm looking at some of the recently-changed beer pages (List_of_breweries_in_California, Beck's Brewery, Storz_Brewing_Company) and they don't seem to have that tag. Does it need to go on the Talk page--those do seem to be tagged there? As a related question, is there an easy way to search for beer-related pages that are not on the transcluded watchlist? Thanks for the help! Prof. Mc (talk) 10:37, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject tags always go on the talkpage of the article, not on the article page itself. I'm not aware of an easy way of searching for beer related pages which are not WikiProject tagged. It would be possible, though tedious and time-consuming, to go through all the articles in Category:Beer and sub-cats. I know that the food and drink project had a bot go through all food and drink related articles and tag them. You could ask User:Jerem43, as I'm sure he had something to do with that. Of course, some beer related articles might not be categorised within the Beer cat family, but finding those is going to be pot luck! SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 16:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

OK, I've gone through each of the states listed at List_of_breweries_in_the_United_States and made sure that each was added to WP:BEER and then assessed each of them as class=list, importance=low as the criteria I saw on the Assessment page. The only exceptions was Vermont, which was a "Brewing in" page, which I assessed at "C." I'd love for someone with more experience to let me know if they see what I saw in that assessment. To me it seemed a bit more substantial than a "start," but I'm happy to get some critique there. Anyway, that ensures that the states are now all in the project and on the transcluded watchlist. I'll continue to add to the leads of each, as I've done for Alabama through Colorado so far. Prof. Mc (talk) 14:51, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

That seems fine. Well done on the work you are doing. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:41, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Assessment Criteria?

I'm doing a bit of cleanup on unassessed articles and have gotten a lot of the low-hanging fruit. So for the rest I was hoping for a bit of guidance on best, or at least most-common, practices. Articles marked as "low" seem to be "lists of," "Brewing in," and the like. Pubs also seem to be in there as well. "Mid" articles tend to be local breweries, or regional breweries. However, there are some breweries in "low," and some "Brewing in" lists are in mid. I know it's subjective so it can be all over the place, but is there a sense among this group about how to place breweries? Local and regional in low, big-regional and national in mid? Something else? I've looked through the two categories pretty extensively and don't see a clear pattern yet. Thanks! Prof. Mc (talk) 00:40, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Importance is fairly subjective. I think the reason for that field is so that projects can focus attention on those articles they feel are important. In the case of this project, that is not worth worrying about as the project is fairly inactive, and has been for some years, so there is no sense of any group activity on priority articles.

There was some nasty infighting a few years back regarding using RateBeer and Beer Advocate as sources, and around the same time, some nasty infighting over use of the BJCP as a source, and some nasty infighting over European v American beer style terminology and theory. It became very unpleasant, and most people just drifted away from both the project as a place to gather, and to editing of beer related articles. I was one of those who drifted away. I have come back to the project as I like to keep it alive, but I don't do much beer article editing any more. The troubles have all stopped now, and I think pretty everyone responsible has left Wikipedia, so it would be good to try to build up the project again.

As regards judging importance - well, a major brewery like Guinness would be top, while a local brewery with little literature on it would be low. Some of the low importance local breweries might be better served as part of regional articles, but that is a matter of case by case judgement. Some sense of importance can be gained from looking at the daily viewing numbers. Guinness gets over 35,000 daily views, while Great Northern Brewery, Dundalk gets less than 550. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 07:01, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Hey Silk - I would like to add, if you don't mind, there are some smaller regional or local breweries that have higher importance. I would say try to look at how the company is treated in the press - does it have only local coverage or does it have more regional, national or international coverage? Look at the impact the brewery may also have - Some small Trappist beers are very important because they are so revered by beer drinkers for their rarity or small runs. As Silk has stated it can be subjective.

If you feel something needs to change when rating an article, ask. It wouldn't hurt. --Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 08:05, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

I remember that well - it was mostly driven by a couple of tendentious editors who were friends of each other. They were determined to maintain a Eurocentric view of beer (at least as it applied to beer styles that had their origins in Europe), and to keep Wikipedia "sanitized" of any influence of the American homebrewing/craft brewing movement. They were particularly stubborn and persistent, and managed to be annoying and undiplomatic enough to really piss off other editors while mostly avoiding being overtly uncivil; they ended up "winning" a lot of disputes simply because they refused to concede and other participants eventually decided it wasn't worth the time and stress. Wikiproject Beer had been making great strides until they crashed the party and drove a lot of contributors away. It's been nearly five years since they left, and to this day it feels like Wikiproject Beer hasn't fully recovered from the damage they did. mwalimu59 (talk) 17:14, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

That sucks. It sounds like a pretty rough time, especially for something that folks volunteer for.

That having been said, I'm happy to be part of any effort to get things re-started in a coordinated fashion. Or I can sort of keep doing what I'm doing--nibbling around the edges of things here and there. Prof. Mc (talk) 17:50, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Brewing in (States/Region)

I'm currently working on Brewing in Vermont and I've added a bunch of citations from my never completed "history of Vermont beer" book. I'm looking for some guidance on what is missing, what should be added, and just general comments. I'd like to make the VT page the reference for what regional/state pages should look like. Thanks Jamesewelch (talk) 17:53, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Tijuana Beer

Any idea wtf is up with the daily back-and-forth assessment and reassessment of this page that's appearing in the Assessment logs? It's bouncing from class=low to class=unknown and back again. I don't see anything in the history of the talk page or the main page. Am I missing something? Prof. Mc (talk) 23:07, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

I see you solved it by removing the beer-project from the WP food banner. That will do the trick. CRwikiCA talk 23:42, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

@CRwikiCA: Yeah, that was the only thing I could think of that would explain why the changes were so regular. Thanks for checking on my work, though. Glad I got it right. Prof. Mc (talk) 12:49, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

I know the feeling, I got bugged by it a while ago as well... CRwikiCA talk 13:18, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject Beers at Wikimania 2014

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 09:14, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Beer in Brazil / Brazilian beer

Hello, how are you all? My name is Roberto and I am a Brazilian journalist writing about beer since 2006. As part of a class I'm attending in Harvard Kennedy School, I have the assignment of making a contribution to Wikipedia. Having some experience on the craft beer world, specially in Brazil, I noticed the Beer in Brazil page could use some updating and more information on the existing breweries (more than 200 by now), its history and the prizes some of them have won all over the world in the recent years.

I would like to know if it is best to open a new article called Microbreweries in Brazil or to add all the info to the already existing Beer in Brazil. I'm also planning to start creating the text on my sandbox this week.

What do you think about it?

Thank you very much for your attention, Brazilianbob (talk) 17:32, 3 November 2014 (UTC) Brazilian Bob (Roberto Fonseca)

Welcome Brazilianbob. The general format for articles is to have an overarching article of "Beer in country" with some also having a "List of breweries in country." (For example: Beer in England and List of breweries in England). The Beer in Brazil page could use some help, particularly with adding sourcing. If you'd like to create an like List of breweries in Brazil you should be bold. It's not necessary that every brewery you include in the list have its own separate article - but if you decide to create separate articles about Brazilian breweries that don't already exist on Wikipedia, make sure that they are notable in some way, or they may deleted. Please also familiarize yourself with some of Wikipedia's core policies, including ensuring a neutral point of view, using verifiable, reliable sources and no original research. In addition, particularly with articles such as these, you should avoid boosterism and peacock phrases. If you need help feel free to ask, and welcome again. — e. ripley\^talk 19:43, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Ripley. I think it's probably best to work on the already existing article Beer in Brazil. My main contribution may be in the history of craft brewing in the country - some microbreweries are already cited, but it seems to me that some context would help a lot (which were the first ones to appear, when, why, which 'brewing schools' are inspiring more the newcomers these days and so forth). I'll probably add also some info about Brazilian Craft Beer Festivals. Thank you one more time and best regards, Roberto.

Guinness RM

You are invited to comment on a requested move at Talk:Guinness#Requested_move_24_December_2014. -- Calidum 06:37, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Research Invitation

Hello Wikipedians,

We’d like to invite you to participate in a study that aims to explore how WikiProject members coordinate activities of distributed group members to complete project goals. We are specifically seeking to talk to people who have been active in at least one WikiProject in their time in Wikipedia. Compensation will be provided to each participant in the form of a $10 Amazon gift card.

The purpose of this study is to better understanding the coordination practices of Wikipedians active within WikiProjects, and to explore the potential for tool-mediated coordination to improve those practices. Interviews will be semi-structured, and should last between 45-60 minutes. If you decide to participate, we will schedule an appointment for the online chat session. During the appointment you will be asked some basic questions about your experience interacting in WikiProjects, how that process has worked for you in the past and what ideas you might have to improve the future.

You must be over 18 years old, speak English, and you must currently be or have been at one time an active member of a WikiProject. The interview can be conducted over an audio chatting channel such as Skype or Google Hangouts, or via an instant messaging client. If you have questions about the research or are interested in participating, please contact Michael Gilbert at (206) 354-3741 or by email at mdg@uw.edu.

We cannot guarantee the confidentiality of information sent by email.

Marge6914 (talk) 21:52, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

The link to the relevant research page is m:Research:Means_and_methods_of_coordination_in_WikiProjects. Md gilbert (talk) 00:30, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragonmead

Please take a look and comment as you think appropriate. Thanks. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Conglomerates and their subsidiaries

Hello,

I was looking at the Wikipedia page for 'Brooklyn Brewery' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooklyn_Brewery) and am surprised to see no mention of Carlsberg ownership.

Please see, http://www.carlsberggroup.com/brands/Pages/BrooklynLager.aspx ,where you can see Brooklyn Brewery is a Carlsberg brand.

With this knowledge, the entire page is inaccurate and misleading. The first sentence, 'Brooklyn Brewery is a brewery in Brooklyn, New York City, USA.' is in fact, false. It should read something like, 'Brooklyn Brewery is a brand of beer manufactured by Carlsberg Group.'

I don't just want to go and edit it though, what do you think?

I wonder how many other microbrews are the same.

Carlsberg and other companies deliberately misrepresent companies like Brooklyn Brewery as independent. This is done to trick people looking for independent companies into purchasing beer from Carlsberg. It is important that consumers can look up brands on Wikipedia and find out who owns what.

So, thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.239.107.210 (talk) 07:34, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Go for it as you think necessary. I would say, though, that "Brooklyn Brewery is a brewery in Brooklyn, New York City, USA" could be easily modified as "Brooklyn Brewery is a brewery in Brooklyn, New York City, USA, owned by the Carlesberg Group." Prof. Mc (talk) 13:51, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Actually, after a bit of digging, it seems that Brooklyn isn't owned by Carlsberg. They have several joint brewing ventures together. That's certainly something that could be noted on the page. But they aren't owned by Carlsberg, as far as can be told. Prof. Mc (talk) 13:57, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Founder's Brewing

Hi there. I'm a new editor! I noticed that Founders Brewing Company was out of date (by at least a couple of years) and had quite a lot of biased information - as if it was written by their marketing person. I took a crack at some updating, and I'd love if any of you more experienced editors would be interesting in working with me on some more improvements? Thanks! --Jonddunn (talk) 17:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Nutrition information

Would someone familiar with standard procedure have a look at Miller Lite#Nutrition Information and decide what should happen. My inclination would be to remove the entire section as unsourced blather (does anyone drink beer for nutrition?). If retained, I guess the heading should be "Nutritional information", or "Contents"? The convert template was broken by a recent IP edit which was attempting to make it display 355 ml instead of 350 ml. Here are the two choices:

• {{convert|12|usoz|ml|adj=on}} → 12-US-fluid-ounce (350 ml)
• {{convert|12|usoz|ml|adj=on|0}} → 12-US-fluid-ounce (355 ml)

Johnuniq (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2015 (UTC)