Template talk:Wines/Archive 1

Proposed replacement scheme
I would prefer to have one template for wine (versus separate templates for varietals, regionals and styles). A single template would allow people to navigate among various wines, whether they happen to be on a page for a varietal or a regional or a style. Here is a quick mockup of what I am imagining. The title for the template could be something like "Major Wine Types" or just simply "Wines." If implemented, the table would need to be formatted consistent with WP templates. This is just a quick rough draft. I may have mis-categorized a few, but this should give the basic idea. Any thoughts? --Mikebrand 18:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Draft template deleted in favor of version 2 below --Mikebrand 17:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

That is actually really good. I like the concept a lot. As a minor suggestion, maybe some shading between the categories. But again, it's a great rough draft. Agne 19:07, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I do think that's a good start. Maybe as Agne said, some shading between the categories.  Also a slightly different color-scheme and smaller fonts.   I'm really not good at it, but might it be okay if I tweek the HTML you posted there?  I don't want to fiddle with your entry without permission.     The Bethling (Talk) 01:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Feel free to fiddle away. I've contributed it to the public domain.  I have never created or extensively modified a WP template, but I presume that the WP formatting tools should be used and not HTML tables.  If people are agreeable to the basic layout of the content, I would suggest concentrating on just the content (ie, which wine terms occupy which cells) of the HTML table I posted.  Hopefully someone more versed in WP markup can format the table to look better. The page for table formatting is quite extensive: Help:Table. I'm always a fan of modifying something that is close to what is needed.  In this case, what we need is an example of an existing table that has a matrix of rows and columns.  --Mikebrand 01:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I like it, especially the fact that it brings together a set of links for all major styles and varietals in one place. I would quibble with some of the detail, but we can discuss that later. I suggest the first thing would be for someone who is good at Wiki formatting and design to make it look good, and then we can try to agree on what wines to include or not. I also agree with the idea that we just call it wines. --Portnadler 16:20, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Version 2

 * Copy of template deleted

I've taken it a step closer. My lunch hour is over, so need to get back to work. Feel free to expand on this --Mikebrand 18:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I've done some tweaks to the formatting, fixed some links and added Bordeaux to regionals. --Portnadler 11:40, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I propose that we now create Wines, put the above table into it and transclude it into this page whilst we continue the discussion. Perhaps we should also delete User:Mikebrand's first draft template (good as it was) to avoid confusion. --Portnadler 16:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The template is looking good. Nice job Portnadler on the formatting. I'm afraid I don't know enough about WP templates to fully understand your first sentence above. If that is the next step in replacing Wine Styles with Version 2 above, then I am for it. I had assumed that we would merely replace the existing code in Major Wine Styles with the code we developed here. But I am guessing that the process you are recommending is a more formal and preferred method? --Mikebrand 17:38, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, my proposal is that we create a new template called Wines, which means that any page can include the text Wines and that will copy it in. We can start by copying the table above to the new template, and then referencing it on this page. Then we can edit the template rather than this page. I also suggest that this new template supersedes both Major Wine Styles and Major Grape Varieties, which means that we should change all the pages that refer to them to refer to the new template instead. That will 'orphan' the old templates, which means it will be easier to renominate them for deletion. --Portnadler 17:27, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

What Portnadlenr describes above sounds good to me. Now, in terms of what goes where in the table: I am certainly no wine expert. When I quickly assigned terms to categories above, I made a few guesses. My, possibly flawed, reasoning for putting Port and Sherry into the Styles category is that Ports and Sherries are produced in regions other than Portugal and Spain and neither is limited to a particular varietal. Following that same logic, I added the generic term Crémant as a Style of Sparkling. Though the term is not well know, it would seem to be instructional to include it in the template. If that logic of "what makes a style" is correct, I am at a loss to come up with any Styles for red, rose or white wines. All the wines I can think of fall into either the Varietals or the Regionals categories. --Mikebrand 17:45, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Template copied here
The template and discussion have now been copied here. --Portnadler 09:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Formatting Issue: width
The table is not shrinking as it should. For example, see the Cabernet Sauvignon page. Depending on the width of the monitor, the right side of the table extends beyond the viewable area. Changing the width from 90% to 80% made the problem less apparent, but even at 90% the table should fit on any screen (filling 90%). The problem is not general to all pages as the table does shrink appropriately on the Grenache page. Ideas? --Mikebrand 17:29, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Never mind. I figured it out.  The old template had "br clear="all"' at the top which did the trick.  --Mikebrand 17:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Vertical Bars
I have removed the vertical bars within each category. They were taking up space and also looked a bit odd when the words wrapped. Now that we have each individual name with a non-breaking space, if necessary, it should resize nicely to suit your browser window. --Portnadler 15:38, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Good. Does look better without the bars.  BTW, on all the Varietals pages listed in this template, I've changed from the old template to this new one without any complaints.  --Mikebrand 17:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I've also changed all the other pages which linked to the old template. --Portnadler 13:58, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

New Category: Dessert Wines
Seems like we need a category for non-fortified dessert wines like Eiswein and Sauternes. In keeping with the progression, I think it would belong after Reds and before Fortified. Objections? --Mikebrand 18:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Categorisation within the box
I'm not sure the split in this template helps us. Should sparkling wine be a separate category alongside red, white... since you can get red white or rosé fizz. Also, the table implies that only prosecco is used for sparkling wines, that Pinot Noir is not used for whites and only red wine is produced in Burgundy. I do feel that a forced matrix like this will always cause problems, because of those wines/regions that belong in several cells, and that a set of separate lists may work better. How about taking these and building them into one tidier table?

Major Grape Varieties

--The Sage of Brouhaha 12:54, 8 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The regional issue you mention is a good point and a drawback of this matrix. Maybe the Wines template should be reformatted so that it is not a matrix.  Instead, it could have row categories that incorporate the templates listed above.  I"m imagining rows labeled:


 * By Varietal
 * By Region
 * By Style
 * By Country
 * There should be some way of separating the black from green grapes within Varietals (maybe two data cells in that row). I'm also not sure of the use of the term Style to denote red, white, rosé, etc (maybe "type" would be better).  Under the scheme I'm proposing, I suppose that Port and Sherry could go into the Region row as the terms originally were Regional.  Crémant would not have a row, but that is probably okay as it is not a common term anyway.
 * --Mikebrand 22:56, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I think style may still work for red and white, as red and white wine production have different methods, but agree we should probably consider the general usage of the terms. Red and white don't have pages, rosé does - should they be left off or should new pages be written?

Grape colour is a much better separation for varietals than wine colour, although this still has problem cases like muscat. Yes agree on Port and Sherry and can't think of any exceptions. I do think there is still a place for a list of styles to reference dessert wines, fortified wines.., but less than important than the other lists. I thought crémant was effectively the French term for sparkling, although I've probably made a huge over-simpification that will offend many.

I think there could be a few problems with having regions in addition to countries. There are a huge number and the choice of which to include could be subjective. There are sub-regions within regions (even sub-sub-regions) and the choice of the level to go down to could be problematic.

How about showing the regions for the country of the current wine page plus the sub-regions for the region of that wine etc..? E.g. if looking at a Chablis then have the list of countries, followed by a list of French wine regions (Bordeaux, Burgundy, Rhone..), followed by the Burgundy sub-regions (Chablis, Cote-des-Nuits, Cote de Beaune...). The wiki categories are already in this form and it feels more intuitive to me. What about producers/chateaux within regions - or am I getting carried away? --The Sage of Brouhaha 13:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The Regionals issue is a tricky one and was a large motivator for moving from the previous version of the template to the current one. Any Wines template must be able to include common wines that are known exclusively by their regional name; specifically: Champagne, Chablis, Beaujolais, Bordeaux, Burgundy, Chianti, Rioja, Marsala and Madeira.  A Wines template would not be complete without them.  However, I do understand the issue of there being many regions.  My thought is that the Regions (or Regionals) should only include wines that are known exclusively by that name.  For example, there are no wines known simply as a Napa Valley.  Instead, the wine would be labeled with the Varietal and location specified as Napa Valley.  Labeling the template row "Regions" (instead of Regionals) would probably prompt users to include regions such as Napa Valley.  The rows do need to be labeled consistently.  So if we used Regionals, we would need labels such a Varietals and Styles (which work fine) and Countries (which sounds a bit odd, but may be fine).


 * In terms of red and white wine, maybe they each do need a separate short page that differentiates them and that links to Wines as the main article. That is essentially the case for all the other types (sparkling, rosé, fortified, dessert).


 * The Muscat color issue (ie, ranging from white to black) raises a point. Maybe the Varietals row does not need to differentiate between grape color.  Maybe all varietals should just be listed alphabetically. --Mikebrand 18:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I think color is the simpler way. Some grapes will have a new "color category": "variable". I think it is interesting to have such grapes separated. Maybe for the Pinot (and other), we can list in "variable" and with the specific name according color of grapes (although is not rare to have Pinots that change color during a long lifetime. Anyway it should be clear the "color" is not a scientific classification, as there are alway exceptions (I saw also a white/rose' merlot grape), but IMHO it help the users more than an alphabetic list. Cate 08:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I have several concerns about the selected regions list you are referring to. I still believe there is an enormous list of wines referred to by region, at least several hundred. The selection of a few is contentious, subjective and largely down to the location of the writer. The list in this form does not reflect the fact that Chablis is a Burgundy wine. Also a list of regions on this basis will always be biased towards old world wines as there is traditionally more of a tendency to refer to region and not varietal when classifying their wines. Have a look at how the categories are already organised for the wine regions, e.g. Category:French_wine_AOCs and Category:Wine_by_country, and you should get an idea of the number of regions (the list is far from complete) and how driving them off country may be better. --The Sage of Brouhaha 10:43, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * A template such as this will always have to be a summary, with some wines included and others excluded. It cannot be an exhaustive list, and such lists should be provided elsewhere, such as in Category or List pages. Personally, I think that the present template has evolved after quite a lot of discussion, and it is the best compromise we have found. --Portnadler 10:53, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I think that if less than twenty regions are to be selected then they should be countries anything less will be too subjective. This ensures complete coverage. The current method also means that representatives of various countries or types are given to placate or fill a space and you end up with the odd situation of including Schilcher and nothing from the Rhone or the New World. --The Sage of Brouhaha 12:07, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

What about this?: WineDraft --The Sage of Brouhaha 12:46, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Overall I like it. However, I am concerned about the lack of major regionals (as per ongoing discussion).  The point of a navigational template is to provide easy linking between related pages.  The Beaujolais page is an appropriate place for this template, so it would be odd for that term to not be included in the template.  A navigational template should not make me click on France to go from one wine page to the Chablis page.  I do not think that many more regions would need to be added to the template (beyond Champagne, Chablis, Beaujolais, Bordeaux, Burgundy, Chianti, Rioja, Marsala, Madeira, Port and Sherry) for it to be complete.  The intention of the template is for it to apply to major wines.  The term "major" could be taken to mean a wine that is readily available at a non-specialty store.  Incidentally, I do not think it is a problem that the template does not make it clear that Chablis is a region within Bordeaux. I am more concerned that Chablis and Bordeaux, both being major terms, are both listed.  --Mikebrand 18:19, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I understand the desire to have quick access to some regions, but I think that it needs to be done with care and avoiding the exclusion of others. We shouldn't be reinforcing the notoriety of any regions.


 * How about this change: I've added a wine regions line that includes well known regions (referring to them as that), but can also include counrty-specific and more local regions by adding  into the template call.  The Wikipedia pages are organised into categories that go along these lines.  There will be some repetition with the well-known regions, but I think that helps understanding.  So, for example, if you were looking at a wine page from the Rhone, add Country=France Region=Rhone and get this:

Example deleted - Now as above
 * Or is this getting too complicated?--The Sage of Brouhaha 12:30, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It is a bit complicated. I don't see the need for a navigational template to pages that do not exist (ie, all those region names in red).  How about changing the row label to Well Known Regions and list 10 or so.  The argument against supporting current noteriety can made about the varietals also.  A 700 acre vinyard in Lebanon can grow a dozen varietals, most of which I am not familiar with.  The navigational template should not aim for comprehensiveness as then it becomes to large and therefor less useful.  A navigational template IMHO should be simple enough to encourage its use.  If there are too many terms, it becomes a chore for the user to find major terms and so is not used.  BTW, if we go forward with the I would favor Blush/Rosé as a single term as they go to the same page.  --Mikebrand 15:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I think the pages do exist for the regions I put in and that Wikipedia already has a fairly good coverage of the regions down to at least one level for a number of countries. They're showing up as red because I haven't yet bothered to sort out all the piped links - I wanted to wait until an approach is agreed before putting in too much work.


 * I understand your point comparing selected regions to selected varietals, but I think the number of varietals that would be used to identify a wine are reasonably few and probably can all be included here - The Lebanese vineyard are more likely to put their location at the front of their wine labels than the obscure varietal.


 * I think it is important to include the country list as this is the way that Wikipedia organises all the pages under Wine. I also think it's important if a selection is used that it's clear it's a selection and be reasonably obvious what the selection method is.  So if you want to include regions that would be well represented in a supermarket call them well-known wine regions - 'Major' is a bit too vague and may end up with a lot of additions over time.  I also think it's very useful to have something listing the various relevant regions on the pages as this is something that is hard to understand but quite crucial for the old world wines.  One concern I've thought of is that one of the most represented wines in a supermarket is Vin de Pays D'Oc and integrating the Vin de Pays could raise even more problems!


 * How about putting the region info into the wine region infoboxes if the navigation box is too big? In an infobox it would be possible to put (e.g. for Chablis): -The country of origin(France), -The region to which Chablis belongs(Burgundy), -Other regions in Burgundy(...), -Sub regions within Chablis (None that I know of). This may be a better way of indicating and navigating the wine region structure for whichever country and could be more flexible.


 * Agree with the Rosé/Blush point - a navigation template isn't the place to suggest new pages. If we want to put in rosé then it would seem odd not to have red&white wine.  Should we add red wine & white wine page requests to the project page, but leave the template as Red/White for now?


 * What is the general view on the horizontal lists vs the matrix? Is it agreed that a matrix will cause too many problems and potentially be confusing?  --The Sage of Brouhaha 16:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * What you propose for the individual pages in terms of regions sounds like a good idea to me. In terms of the template: I agree that the countries list will be useful; combining Red/White seems to be the best option at present.  For the regions row, how about the label of "Well Known Regionals"?  I think that would allow inclusion of terms that used to be regions, but are now styles (eg, Port).  If you were to implement as described, a few terms could drop out.  Specifically: Prosecco, Cava, Supmante, Seko, Crémant, Liebfraumilch, Schilcher, Marsala, Madiera, Sherry.  I added all those terms to the template and I will not be bothered if they are not included in the new template.  I do think that Beaujolais belongs in the list.  --Mikebrand 17:46, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with the names to drop out and have added a few others, but am not sure about those. I am a bit concerned that there is nothing included for Germany, but using wines/regions as the descriptor we could add in Liebfraumilch (well-known doesn't mean we have to consider quality!).


 * I'm not too keen on using the word regional for the reason that its not meant to be used in this context. In the dictionary regional is an adjective, in wine usage regional means a blend from several vineyards in one region and is not necessarily the context we are using here.  Varietal means wines that take their names from their dominant grape and, since the pages that the navigation box links to are written as descriptions of the grapes, I suggest we stick to 'Grape varieties'. --The Sage of Brouhaha 21:29, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I like the template you have above. You, oh Sage of Brouhaha, have put at least as much work into that draft as any of us had put into previous versions of the template.  As far as I'm concerned, you can replace the current code for the template with the code for the draft.
 * Your draft has the following benefits:
 * Adds links to wine making countries
 * Eliminates confusion on where to categorize regions (eg, does Bordeaux belong in just the red row, or does it also go into the white row).
 * Does not contain the empty cells of the matrix (the matrix was my idea, so you shouldn't need to worry about someone else being offended when it is replaced).
 * Separates Varietals from Regionals (mixing of the two was a problem with the version that was replaced by the matrix).
 * I would suggest just one change: moving the countries to the bottom of the template. 1) there are a bunch, and they would seem to more naturally provide a base to the template and 2) the country names are not wine-specific, while the other terms are wine-specific.  For a first-time viewer, I think it would be more intuitive to have only wine-specific terms in the first few rows.
 * Of course, I am just one contributor, but it seems that I'm the only other one showing much interest at this point :-) --Mikebrand 00:56, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Done.--The Sage of Brouhaha 09:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It looks great. Sage of Brouhaha, it has also been a pleasure working with you on this template.  You have been very accomodating of suggetions even though the final template was not quite what you had in mind (especially in relation to the regions issue).  --Mikebrand 17:17, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

New Version
I was about to say "go for it", when I noticed that it had been done. I think it's a significant improvement. I have just made a couple of small changes: Chateauneuf du Pape is too specific, so I have changed it to Rhone. I've also corrected the link to the style Fruit. However, I must say that, IMHO, I would remove Fruit altogether, but I'm not going to get too hung up on this. --Portnadler 10:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Template
The design of this template is excellent -- subtle colors and text is small enough that the template is not too big. Good job to whoever came up with this. Badagnani 11:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Black/red
Shouldn't the heading for red grapes say "Red," not "Black"? Badagnani 11:08, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * These grapes vary in colour from red through to black. I think it's best to stick to black to avoid confusion with grapes for red wine and white wine.  But then, should white be changed to green?  --The Sage of Brouhaha 11:39, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Ha ha! Badagnani 11:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)