Talk:Single pot still whiskey

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 September 2019 and 11 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dylan Persad.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

What makes pot stills unique to Ireland?
The main article says that pot still is unique to Ireland, and I understand that if someone in Ireland wishes to make pot still whiskey it has to be made to a certain recipe/process. But is there anything that legally prevents anyone else in any other country to use that recipe/process and call it pot still whiskey? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.53.0.162 (talk) 01:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)


 * There is nothing to prevent anyone from making or producing pot still whiskey outside of Ireland. The only prohibition would be if they attempted to refer to it as Irish whiskey.  Prost! Hammersbach (talk) 12:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


 * This page probably shouldn't even exist. There aren't really even any reliable sources to establish notability, or to even establish that the term "pure pot still whiskey" is commonly used and has a specific meaning. There's already a page describing what a pot still is.  Objectively, pot still whiskey is simply whiskey that was produced by a pot still.  "Pure" is simply a nice sounding adjective, without really adding anything to the term. There is some nonsense about the term only applying to Irish whiskey, but there's plenty of pot still whiskey produced outside of Ireland, and there's nothing about Irish whiskey that makes it more pure than whiskey from anywhere else. 99.12.238.185 (talk) 07:27, 1 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Regarding the remark above that "I understand that if someone in Ireland wishes to make pot still whiskey it has to be made to a certain recipe/process" – actually, that does not seem to be true. The regulation governing the production of Irish whiskey says nothing about pot stills and does not define the term "pure pot still". The regulations governing Irish whiskey are actually relatively lax in general. See the Irish whiskey page for a reference to the actual regulation. –BarrelProof (talk) 14:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

This page should be updated to reflect the new naming. 'Pure pot still whiskey' which, in Ireland, refers to a (triple distilled) whiskey made with both malted and unmalted barley (and in the past a small amount of other grains like oats) in a pot still. Contrary to the post above this phrase is in common use in Ireland and both Redbreast and Green Spot have had this phrase printed on the bottle. Furthermore, the majority of blended Irish whiskey (those not from the Bushmills or Cooley distilleries) are a blend of pure pot still whiskey and grain whiskey. Recently however, the phrase has been changed to 'Single pot still' (still ambiguous!) and the labellings have been updated to reflect this.(It was used as early as 2004 for e.g. the special 10yo 200th anniversary Green Spot). Two new 'single pot still' whiskies were released in May 2011: Power's John Lane Reserve 12 year old and Midleton Barry Crockett Legacy. Along with an older Redbreast (Redbreast 15) that brings the total number of single pot still whiskies to 5. They are 'single' as pure pot still whiskey is only made at the midleton distillery. This new phrase will be/ is being regulated for by the Irish Spirits Association. http://www.whiskyadvocateblog.com/2011/01/26/pure-pot-still-irish-whiskey-is-now-single-pot-still/   Photos of labels can be found here http://irishwhiskeychaser.webs.com/  82.31.176.7 (talk) 23:08, 21 January 2012 (UTC)Seán


 * If the new phrase is adopted into Irish whiskey regulations, then I would support having it described in Wikipedia. But the problem I have with both phrases is that they seem to primarily be terms used by one company for promotion of its own products, rather than something with a widely-accepted definition. The only source of information here seems to be the company that uses the phrase on its labels. Now the government has told them that their previous promotional phrase is misleading (because of its vague claim of purity), so they made up a new one. But it's still just one company using and promoting the phrase at this point – unless some new sources of information appear. All of the brands that use the phrase seem to be made by the same company. —BarrelProof (talk) 02:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey BarrellProof, glad to see you here! With all due respect, the above isnt true. (although i have immense respect for the fact that you both went to the trouble of looking it up and had the good sense not to trust a self-interested company's presentation of its 'history.') Cooley (formerly independent, now owned by Beam Global) produce Single Pot Still spirit too now (although its rather young) through both their riverstown distillery and their kilbeggan distillery and they label it as such. Furthermore the term is used by criticism, the IWS, and virtually everybody in the whiskey world. Here's a link to a blog kept by IWS committee member David Havelin that happens to have a picture of one of Cooley's SPS products with the term used on its labeling:

http://www.irishwhiskeynotes.com/2011/11/new-cooley-poitin.html

Its a moot point now as its been changed but i'd also like to emphatically point out that the term PPS as a signifier for the mixed mash in no way whatsoever originates with midleton as a "promotional phrase" and is actually much older than the term single malt. The term is significantly older than either the Midleton distillery or IDL as a company and can be found all over the 'widely accepted language' of the whiskey world from Jim Murray's whisky bible to Charles MacLean's "Scotch, a liquid history" (specifically the chapters on the 1800s.) If you'd like resources on this, I'd recommend two very important primary sources. The first is "Truths about whisky" (spelled without the e) -- a pamphlet drawn up by a union of irish distillers during the late 1800s during the emergence of blended whiskey in which they try to clarify to the public the difference between "pure pot still whiskey" from blended alternatives. The other invaluable resource is Alfred Barnard's "Distilleries of the United Kingdom," also from the late 1800s, in which he recorded his visits to 28 irish distilleries (and, if you're interested in the history of Scotch, a whole range of scottish malt distilleries too!) and he clearly uses the phrase all through the book to distinguish Irish mixed mash pot still whisky from the highland malt stuff he's drinking in the scottish section of the book and even from the irish distillery Coleraine (now long dead, unfortunately) who were making malt whisky in a pot still as opposed to the normal irish pure pot still style. Anyway, there are plenty of other resources out there that are more recent etc but those two are key texts for any whisky historian so i thought i'd send them your way. Another excellent historical account thankfully stripped of IDL's self promotion is Brian Townsend's "Lost Distilleries of Ireland," which goes into tremendous depth about the production practices of the numerous irish PPS distilleries that went silent during the collapse of the Irish distilling industry. The recent codification of SPS as a new phrase is actually almost identical to the codification of "Single Malt" in scotch not so very long ago. Before that there were bottles labeled "malt" "pure malt" "exclusive highland malt" etc. It's the concept that's important, but its also important that this was accepted across the whiskey world across multiple companies, the universal terminology of major critics and the Irish Whiskey Society itself, which is probably the most resolutely independent voice in such a scenario as, unlike either critics or companies, they're non-profit (all revenue goes to the purchase of society bottles, the coordination of tastings, and the selection of casks etc) so nobody stands to make a profit from what they're saying. With all this in mind i would like to recommend either the speedy deletion of the existing page which neither talks about the historical style nor the concept of a pot still in any great depth (and is littered with fragments of edits from one or the other) or, preferably, the renaming and thorough cleaning up of the existing article. With your help and wikipedia know-how, i would be happy to take on such a project and provide any citations necessary to books, independent websites, and even primary historical sources if necessary. I care a lot about this style of whiskey and getting the real hard information out there but i have no idea how to go about it.

cheers!

Trestarig (talk) 13:14, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I am glad to hear that. But at the moment, I'm rather busy, so I may not be able to help much with editing in the short term. The link to the photo with the phrase on the label seems nice. It's generally desirable to find references that are accessible on the Internet. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:37, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

no worries BarrelProof, whatever advice you can give whenever you can is more than helpful. How do we go about changing the name of the article? This seams the easiest way of cleaning up the mess. Any thoughts? Trestarig (talk) 20:48, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Please refer to the article Requested moves. That is something you can actually do yourself, but it may be better to have a more formal consideration before taking that action. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:50, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, now I see that the other article (Single Pot Still Whiskey) has already been created. Perhaps what is needed at this point is an action known as a "merge" rather than a move. Or perhaps a "speedy delete" followed by a move (since the other article was only created today and the real intent was a move). —BarrelProof (talk) 18:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

The Pure Pot Still Article shouldn't exist
As i and others have mentioned in the section below, this article shouldnt even exist and i would like to nominate it for deletion. I sent a lengthy message on this subject to user BarrelProof and thought it would be worth reposting the relevant sections here to explain the situation although the message in its entirety can be read on his talk page. I am very new to wikipedia and would appreciate any and all help from other, more experienced, users in cleaning up the existing material. Slainte!

The article titled "Pure Pot Still Whiskey" started out inaccurate, and then due to a few coincidental misunderstandings of the term, became completely divorced from its original topic and now, due to changes in the industry, should be deleted anyway and replaced with a different article, if not two. The term "Pure Pot Still Whiskey" historically refers to a style of whiskey that arose in Ireland after the hike in the malt taxes during the Napoleonic wars. It does not refer to the theoretical concept of whiskey made in a "pot still" but rather the style resulting from the distillation of malted AND unmalted barley in a pot still. (Historically, the unmalted or "green' section of the wash sometimes included small amounts of other unmalted grains as well. The term isn’t a great signifier for its concept, as single malts or, say a pot still bourbon, are also theoretically “purely made in a pot still” but it is the term that history has coughed up. The article was originally a bit of a lackluster stub but some well-meaning editors unfamiliar with the term seemed to stumble on it and, with the best intentions, said that there was nothing uniquely irish or mixed mash about the concept of a pot still and, on the strength of that conviction, deleted the small amount of information that there was. As it stands, the current article neither describes the historical style nor the actual process of theoretical pot still distillation. An article on the latter should be given a name like "pot still distillation" and should outline the chemistry of the pot still in comparison the column still. (Come to think of it, this would be a very worthwhile article as the old pot still/column still divide has relevance not only for whisky but for brandy and other craft distillates...) Although the original PPS style was widely popular during the victorian age, it was almost wiped out in the early 20th as a result of the convergence of the Irish War of independence, the economic war with Britain, the subsequent civil war in Ireland, and the untimely declaration of prohibition in the U.S. As a result, Ireland's once vibrant distilling scene fell almost completely silent over the space of two decades and, as this unfortunately happened at the same time as the actual creation of the independant Irish Free State and, eventually, the subsequent Republic of Ireland, there has been no law written in Ireland explaining the specific definition of the term. As a result, the cooley distillery started labeling some of their products as “Pure pot still single malts” during the 90s but have subsequently ceased the practice and have even recently begun experiments to produce genuine pps whiskeys of their own to compliment their single malt line. Anyway, this is all rather irrelavent as the industry and major critical bodies thankfully have come together in the last two years to lobby the EU for a new official definition (I spoke with the IWS president Leo Phelan (who can be contacted on their website) a week ago and he can offer more information about this legal process) and the style, under its more rigourous specifications has been renamed “Single Pot Still.” This new name is presumably meant to put it in more obvious contrast with its “Single Malt” cousin and also to satisfy American liquor laws which have a prohibition-old distaste for the word “pure” being written on an alcohol label. The industry, the IWS, and the early stages of the long EU certification process have all accepted the new term (not all that historically diferent from the clarification of “Single Malt” decades ago, as old bottles of SM scotch used to use all manner of terms like “pure malt” “all malt” etc) and, in light of such changes, I would like to recommend the speedy deletion of the existing muddled article and the construction of a more thorough article on Single Pot Still whiskey.

Trestarig (talk) 18:37, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello Trestarig. Since you stated that you would appreciate any help that you could get may I offer that you review WP:MOS?  That will help you with some of the presentation that Wickedlypedia insists upon.  Sláinte!  Hammersbach (talk) 04:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Hammersbach! will do!

Trestarig (talk) 14:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Page merge/redirect
Looking at it, it seems the most straightforward thing to do would be to redirect this article to single pot still whiskey, as that is now the standard term and is more accurate in describing this as an Irish-specific term of art. oknazevad (talk) 22:30, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * So that's what I (finally) did. To match, I also moved this talk page to serve as the talk page for the single pot still article. Essentially the same effect as a move and merge. oknazevad (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

well done Oknazevad! Glad to have this mess finally cleared up. When i've a bit more time i'll start beefing out the new article for history etc but at least we've gotten rid of the misinformation Trestarig (talk) 14:30, 3 May 2012 (UTC)