Talk:The World Atlas of Wine

Discussion header
I am neither Hugh Johnson nor Jancis Robinson, and I have no commercial connection with either, or any of their books, or any vested interest in their commercial success, but for anyone who knows anything about wine The World Atlas of Wine is a landmark publication, and it is instructive for those beginning to learn this subject to understand why.

If it is permissible in Wikipedia to say that Hamlet is "among the most powerful and influential tragedies in the English language" and provides a storyline capable of "seemingly endless retelling and adaptation by others" or, indeed, that The Oxford Companion to Wine is "the most useful wine book ever published", and "the one essential book for any wine-lover", I cannot understand why The World Atlas of Wine reads any more like an advertisement than the two examples given, unless you would like to see all the works of Shakespeare marked for speedy deletion. Please explain, and I will act accordingly. Mr Meticulous (talk) 09:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The article was not selected for speedy deletion, just tagged for cleanup. Nobody looking into the subject would consider this book insufficiently notable for WP. What does become an issue is when the language is less encyclopedic and more like a passionate recommendation. The sources can't be assembled too lightly (WP:RS doesn't cover a bread text from an internet sales site) and personal opinion needs to be left out per WP:OR. Hope this is helpful. M URGH   disc.  14:57, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Agree on the notability of the book (which, BTW, I've used more than once to write or fact-check wine-related Wikipedia articles), but the tone of the article is a bit too promotional to be encyclopedic. Tomas e (talk) 18:02, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * With respect, it was proposed for speedy deletion on the grounds that it read like an advertisement. I am glad that notice has now been withdrawn, and quite happy for others to "cleanup" into a supposedly more encyclopedic style. However, if you consider the language to be "less encyclopedic and more like a passionate recommendation", I assume that you will be as eager to put a cleanup notice on The Oxford Companion to Wine for its use of "the most useful wine book ever published", and "the one essential book for any wine-lover". Mr Meticulous (talk) 19:24, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * JFTR: This is the version just before you added the "hangon" template, and it really was just tagged with a cleanup marker. It had a notice how to propose an article for speedy deletion, which you probably mistook for an actual nomination: For blatant advertising that would require a fundamental rewrite to become encyclopedic, use db-spam to mark for speedy deletion.. Cheers, Amalthea (talk) 19:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

That's the one I was referring to. Thanks. Mr Meticulous (talk) 08:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * So as you see it wasn't tagged for speedy deletion but containing several elements that people who patrol new pages, generally guided by WP:NOT, tend to react to. To point elsewhere to The Oxford Companion to Wine, a stub with cited quotations, and respond with words as "supposedly more encyclopedic style" suggest that you might give WP:AGF a read.  M URGH   disc.  09:09, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on The World Atlas of Wine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080214050732/http://www.jancisrobinson.com/articles/20070106_1 to http://www.jancisrobinson.com/articles/20070106_1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:01, 21 July 2016 (UTC)