User talk:Tomas e/Archive 2008

Re: KlevEner de Heiligenstein
You're welcome, and thanks for your work! I thought "Klevener" and "Klevner" were synonym, though a Google search for "Klevner de Heiligenstein" suggested to try the spelling "Klevener de Heiligenstein", and a quick search showed that the two terms should not be confused., Best regards, Korg (talk) 21:32, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Your opinion
Hej Tomas. If you could give a word of advice, I've been thinking of starting individual Bordeaux AOC pages (like many other regions have, but Bordeaux only a Margaux AOC which redirects to the region article), and in the process distinguish a lot of the links that either are intended to go to communes or same-name AOCs. I have some decent RS for this, but my printed material isn't the most up-to-date kind, so as far as the particulars of local restriction there's a chance it's not ideally precise or current. You shared a link the other day to Margaux AOC laws but I can't find an acqueil to an INAO list of all the AOCs (my French is far from super).. do you have that, and are there other links you think would be helpful? M URGH  disc.  14:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello Murgh (eller kanske "Hei"?). Although I live in French-speaking Brussels (well, since two weeks...) my French is almost non-existent, outside some wine and gastronomy terms. I've used the INAO documents for writing/updating a few Wiki articles, but if I look for more than varietal names or numerical data I usually Google-translate the contents... I'm afraid I've never encountered a comprensive official list of all the AOCs at INAO. You can search to see if something you know the name of is really an AOC or a VDQS, but for the other way around, I know of no other way than using secondary (non-INAO) sources, which risks being wrong or at least out of date. (Also, INAO is extremely inferior to the German Wine Institute in publishing statistics, but that's another story.) About Bordeaux, I remember having read that there were changes in 2007 or 2006, when a few Côtes de Bordeaux (?) AOCs amalgamated, so this fact could be a litmus test if the sources are updated or not. But with 50-something Bordeaux AOCs, it seems reasonable to have separate articles on (some of) them, as long as it focuses on AOC-specific material. I'm rather sure that our List of Appellation d'Origine Contrôlée wines is not totally correct, and I just realised I don't have it on my watch list - I just noted someone has put (back) all the Alsace Grand Cru lieux dits which are not separate appellations, so there is cleanup work to do. Tomas e (talk) 15:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, I noticed that AOC list just the other day and it struck me as in need of a plan and a firm hand. Thanks for confirming what I suspected, that INAO are not the most excellent or transparent communicators of their stuff. It doesn't surprise that the Germans cover that much better. I was thinking articles for the chief AOCs, and some collected solutions for the lesser ones, maybe have satellite AOCs as sections below the main one.. I'll take it slowly (and not jump into starting 52 articles ;) ), and see how it goes. Cheers, M URGH   disc.  17:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * A "semi back route" could be the official list of which regional committee that tests/awards AOC status (or whatever it is they do) for each AOC. The list is refered to by the List of Appellation d'Origine Contrôlée wines, and it can be found here on a more official-looking site; roll down to the annexes. (It also contains eaux du vie AOCs.) The problem is that it is from 2004, and on average there seems to be at least a couple of AOC promotions or name changes per year, and it doesn't look like this text has been updated/consolidated since its publication. I suppose that detective work on AOC changes 2004-2008 is possible (most of them would probably have been the subject of an online note from Decanter, for example), but it seems the kind of manual work that should be avoidable. Tomas e (talk) 17:54, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * OMG, you two are brave, brave souls to take on that mess. While I've never been able to find an online list, the latest addition of Sotheby's seems to be fairly complete in the listings of AOCs. I REALLY like Murgh's idea of consolidating the smaller, satellite AOCs. I tip my hat to the both of you. It'll be a lot of work but if you can wade through it, it would be an awesome resource to have. AgneCheese/Wine 18:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it's possible to email INAO? Btw, if Murgh writes an article on each Bordeaux AOC he will have a good excuse to buy and open at least one bottle from each appellation, because the articles of course need to be illustrated :-) Tomas e (talk) 20:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It is an excellent excuse. We'll see how much stamina I have for opening them though. The CIVB urls is the best online source I've spotted (though lacking the "letter of the law"), so between that and the books I have something to start with. M URGH   disc.  00:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Riesling
Hey Tomas, not to distract you too much from your AOC work, but I was wondering if you would be willing to do a little clean up on the Riesling article? The GA folks are doing sweeps of current GA articles (Champagne (wine region) and Carménère were recently done), and I'm concerned that Riesling might get a quick delist. For one, the lead paragraph is not up to snuff according to WP:LEAD and the Good article criteria. I'm asking you because I did the original expansion and GA nomination of Riesling. It was early in my wiki-career and, to be perfectly frank, I think my early work sucks. :p The clean up and additions you did in September were really great and I think you're probably the best person to take this article under your wing and up to GA snuff. I'll be glad to help if you want but, in my personal opinion, the article should probably be rewritten from scratch and a fresh set of eyes is always the best for that. AgneCheese/Wine 21:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, a demotion of Riesling would really feel bad! I would rather have thought that it could be on its way up to FA rather than down to non-GA... Will have a look, but more serious work will probably have to wait until the weekend. Tomas e (talk) 23:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

French wine
Hi Tomas, thanks for your contribution concerning the list of french AOC wines, mainly because YOU ARE WRIGHT. But the current version of the list is so imprecise in so many points, and definitely false in others! Many spellings are wrong, and the lack of AOC labels IS ENORMOUS, so I just adapted the list from the french wikipedia to the english wikipedia. From my point of view that was much better than just leave the page as it was... (and even the french version is not yet finished, mainly because I don't have any more time to finish it).

Those are just some points to discuss :

- I created a list for the VDQS wines, their place is then in that list, not in the AOC one.

- "Provence and Corsica" is just a commission, a part of the INAO, not a unified vineyard area. "Provence" and "Corsica" are two VERY different vineyard areas.

- "Languedoc" and "Roussillon" are also two different vineyard areas, even if they are next to each other. When spelt together (Languedoc-Roussillon) it is an administratif region of the French Republic, not related to wine in any sens.

- Just check the link "Sud-Ouest" (a vineyard area). You'll laugh... :)

- The official designation for the "Alsace Grand Cru" is "« Alsace Grand Cru » suivi d'un nom de lieudit" ("Alsace Grand Cru" followed by a lieudit's name"). Not any "lieudit" is authorized, the list of 51 designations following the AOC is precise and means, thus, 51 AOC labels. Of course you know them. It is a point of view ? an opinion ? I don't think so, it appears to me as being obvious: there are currently 51 AOC Grands Crus. Same thing for "Vin de Corse AOC", or other similar cases.

- Concerning the vineyard areas. There are (certainly not "de jure" but "de facto") 15 vineyard areas in France, and some of them are represented by an article in the english wikipedia. They are :


 * Alsace
 * Beaujolais
 * Bordeaux
 * Burgundy
 * Champagne
 * Corsica
 * Côtes du Rhône (or maybe "Rhône Valley" in english)
 * Jura
 * Languedoc
 * Lorraine
 * Provence
 * Roussillon
 * Savoie (in english... "savoy" ???)
 * Sud-Ouest
 * Val-de-Loire (or "Loire Valley" in english)

- the first list's table (sorted by AOC) is not in the same standard than the second one.

- There are VERY small vineyards in Île-de-France (mainly three, but they are ridiculously small). They don't appear here, of course, taht's regular, but other small vineyards were considered as production areas. The "Coteaux du Lyonnais" are close enough to the "Côtes du Rhône" to be considered a part of them, and they are too small to be considered as an independent one... Other regional vineyards ("vin de pays" or "vin de table" labels) are not concerned by the AOC production areas.

- "Côtes du Forez" or "Côtes d'Auvergne" (this one is a VDQS) are not vineyard areas in the same level as Burgundy or Bordeaux, they are small vineyards, included in the Loire Valley wines. As the "Anjou" wines are a part of Loire valley wines, or "Bergerac" is a part of "Sud-Ouest" wines. There are so many examples.

- Pinneau des Charentes is not properly spelt and IS NOT A WINE, it's a "mistelle". In the Charentes region THERE IS NO OTHER ALCOHOL AOC than "Cognac" (which of course is not a wine). Perhaps there's a marc alcohol, but no AOC wine anyway.

- "Est" (in the list) is in fact the vineyard area of the region of Lorraine. It should appear as "Lorraine" (in french : "vignoble lorrain" or "vignoble de Lorraine").

- "Côtes de Toul", "Orléans", "Orléans-Cléry" and other recently created AOC are missing int the list.

- Check the Burgundy wines (as an example) in the french wikipedia list, they are in the INAO and in the "arrêté", and there are so many of them missing here...

Those are just some conflicting points of the page (and there are others, of course). There's an encredible amount of work to do here ! A daunting task...

Well, I didn't want to make the mess in the page, sorry if I did. Anyway I'm not a native english speaker and I'll leave my english speaking friends take care of the page, sure, no problem.

Kisses from Paris !

Kintaro

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.212.65.124 (talk) 16:09, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thnk U
Thank you very much for your kind message. I have already corrected the mistake you pointed out in Klevener de Heiligenstein. If you see any other problem, you can contact with me again. It's a pity you don't speak Spanish, you know. But there are many other interesting things than speaking foreign languages, for instance, drinking foreign wines or eating foreign cheeses, which are two of my passions! I try to translate from English and French at the same time and I am learning a lot about these things, but sometimes I just get confused. If there is any article about these subjects that you think is particularly good, you can tell me so I could try to translate it. Kaornega--80.36.68.39 (talk) 19:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history coordinator selection
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Woody (talk) 10:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

German wine regions
Thanks for your work creating articles on Germany's wine regions. The information was sorely needed and you've done a great job. —  AjaxSmack   04:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the encouragement! Always nice to know that people read what you write, and it did irritate me that we had a nice, illustrated navigation template but not a specific article for all the wine regions. It felt like a good use of my wiki-time to create a complete structure on the regional level, which can be used by e.g. "regional enthusiasts" that wish to add material. Tomas e (talk) 18:53, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Dear Tomas


 * Nice to read from you officially on my german user talk (Patrick Bous). My source concerning the grapes for german Qualitätswein is: Taschenbuch der Rebsorten; Walter Hillebrand, Heinz Lott, Franz Pfaff; 13. edition 2003; Fachverlag Dr. Fraund GmbH.
 * I'm a little bit jealous of your work here (and of the work of Agne, Flagsteward,...) as I saw that you are used to visit German Weinversteigerung and I assumed, that your german is not as bad. Now I am sure that your german is excellent and it would be great to hear sometimes about your projects here.
 * During the next weeks, I will focus my Wikipedia-work on some smaller articles on grapes, french wine regions and on american wine regions. Untill end of april, I will try to improve the main article Wein with some related sub-subjects. Best regards from Belgium -- Patrick Bous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.67.139.166 (talk) 21:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * What I coincidence that you write from Belgium - I started working in Brussels just a month ago. (Unfortunately my wine cellar is still in Stockholm so I've mainly had to survive on the Delhaize and Carrefour wine selection.) Yes, I attended all three VDP auctions in 2005 as well as in 2007 (more drinking than buying, but don't tell those who arrange it...) - and last year I tried to capture a few photos that would work well on wiki. My German is good enough to understand German sources, but not good enough to produce dewiki text, so I keep to Swedish and English in that respect. Tomas e (talk) 21:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I think, that it is possible to survive with the Delhaize or Carrefour selection :-). The major problem in Belgium is, that they are really focussed on french wine and it rather difficult to find some nice italian, spain or german wines and i'm not speaking about californian, argentinian or chilenian once. I wish you a good luck in Brussels (a real international melting pot). I'm living near to the german border in Eupen. -- Patrick 87.67.139.166 (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, then you're almost within biking distance of Mosel, so you don't have to worry about what the supermarket chains import. :-) I agree with the observation of the French focus, but the selection in Belgium is way wider than in France itself, where the total selection of vins entranger would be one small shelf in a big store. But I do notice that non-French wine is more found in the "middle price" range in many non-specialised Belgian stores, so it's less easy than in many other wine-importing countries to find the really good wines from Germany, Austria, Spain, Italy, Australia... BTW, a few weeks ago, attended a tasting arranged by François Langbeen who someone called "the man who has put German wines back on the map in Belgium" so there may be hope after all. Tomas e (talk) 22:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

A little image advice
Tjena' du.. If you could give me your opinion: I've found these nifty little château ID cards from the 30s, and have inserted two of them so far, Image:Ausone 1931 chateau card.JPG, Image:Cantemerle 1931 chateau card.JPG but I'm not very sure about the tags they ought to have. Even though they're old, I guess not old enough to be public domain, so I opted for fair use logo, not right for commons.. You think this works or would you recommend a different approach? M URGH  disc.  16:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I'm not very good at copyright questions, I've mainly been categorizing wine-related imagaes. I have uploaded a few old Swedish images of old scientists, but those were taken from an edition of Nordisk familjebok which I know is in the public domain, because it can be found in Project Runeberg. You can't get away with the 70 year rule? If there is no known author, I think it's 70 years after publication, otherwise 70 years after death. Tomas e (talk) 17:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * OK. well the book is at least 76 years old with no specific author, but they're like little old advertisings.. I'll look around for this sort of license then, thanks. M URGH   disc.  18:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * They look a bit like they could have been used to identify genuine bottles in difference to fakes? Could come in handy if you do business with certain people I guess... :-) Tomas e (talk) 18:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Absolutely. It seems knowing the exact particulars of the cork print is one's best bet, I read somewhere that's where frauds have been most sloppy. Of course HR cleverly stuck to older goods. It's weird, I have a Decanter from 86 where Robinson and Broadbent were at one of the first Th.J tastings, Robinson describes first impressions of Rodenstock and his "big-league friends", he is then a disarmingly charming "Herr Yquem" (with posse of "Herr Chaval Blanc" and "Herr Petrus" etc), and it is pretty fascinating reading 20 years later. M URGH   disc.  21:21, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * In JR's defence, she hasn't tried a bit to hide "her part" of adding to Rodenstock's fame, even on her own website . It was fascinating to learn that the presently much-bashed Parker declined further invitations after one visit, in difference to several Brits. To be quite honest, my opinion of Michael Broadbent has not been exactly unaffected by what I've read about his involvment in the whole affair. Tomas e (talk) 21:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * ...and in case you haven't already read the two long online articles (one of them in German) I listed as "further reading" in the HR article - do so! They are fascinating, and especially the Stern article. I almost got the impression that they try to bait him to sue them for defamation. Tomas e (talk) 21:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It's juicy stuff. And it would be nice to know German for Stern (who will get him into court?), but the New Yorker article is a great read. I hadn't seen those JR entries (excellent outcry: "He's a common sophisticator!") I didn't mean the 86 article makes her look bad by any means, she just reports in her peppy way, goes along for the experience, offers impressions and reasonably ponders that wine from 1787 was likely to have been fortified. But yes, all in all it's a sad end chapter for Broadbent. M URGH   disc.  22:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Riesling part deux
Hey Tomas, thank you so much for the clean up work in Riesling. It is a lot better today than it was a few weeks ago and should be safely in the clear from losing GA status during the sweeps. One thing that maybe of interest is that the May edition of Wine Blogging Wednesday is slated to featured "Old World Riesling" and may even be a global event. Our Riesling (and probably German, Alsatian and Austrian wine) articles will receive a lot of traffic during that month. Just want to give you a heads up. AgneCheese/Wine 02:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, good to know. Unless things have changed dramatically in the last few weeks, I suppose our Austrian coverage is the weakest of these. Curiously, it seems to be same with dewiki. Their overview article is very "listy", there are hardly any specific articles on the Austrian wine regions (only some wine-growing material in general regional articles) and there are hardly any Commons images of Austrian wines or vineyards. Tomas e (talk) 09:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

"Professional wine literature or the texts of any formal wine-related regulations"
Hi,

Thanks for your comments. The policy that I am following is that Wikipedia is not "professional wine literature" or "formal wine-related regulations". It is an encyclopedia available to people of all countries and all professions and non-professions. I agree that specialist terms such as hectares, lakhs, dunams, quintals, hectolitres, jō are relevant but they are not the only consideration when trying to communicate to ordinary people. Otherwise Wikipedia would be unreadable beyond the few articles in your own domain. An equivalent but more widespread and more widely understood plain term is always worthy of consideration, we should consider speaking in plain terms. More people comprehend 4 km² than understand 400 hectares.

The comparison with American use of acres is not an excuse for hectares because we do not regard translation word-for-word between Swedish and English as always the best idea. Americans do not consider what metric countries do when considering their units. If they did, they would use quarts for petrol rather than gallons because quarts are the closest word-for-word translation of litres. Furthermore, Americans are often confused about units and frequently translate acres into square miles to make it easier for themselves.

I hope that explains it. I disagree with you but welcome your comments as part of the usual debate. Lightmouse (talk) 21:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Do I read you right if I think that your opinion is that wine literature and official publications of wine is irrelevant when deciding on what units to use in wine-related articles on Wikipedia? So what would your reliable sources for wine-related WIkipedia articles be? Tomas e (talk) 21:40, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * No you do not read it right. I did not say publcations are irrelevant. I said the opposite:
 * Quote: specialist terms ... are relevant
 * I hope that clarifies it. Lightmouse (talk) 22:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Good! It was the "I disagree" part that made me wonder. But let's keep any follow-up discussion on your talk page, which is what I would consider standard practice. Tomas e (talk) 22:33, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Wiki Winos invitation
Hey Tomas! Much to my shock, I realized that I have never asked you about participating in the Wiki-Winos segment of the newsletter! How could you have escaped my attention? :p Let me know if you are interested or better yet, take a peak at the interview questions and feel free to post any replies to the to the answer page. AgneCheese/Wine 01:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, perhaps it'll have to wait a little while. Busy moving and so on. Tomas e (talk) 18:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)
The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 08:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

March 2008
Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 21:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary.  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 21:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Shiraz count
Ahh, ok, so basically you did lots of manual counting, ouch :-) I tried to do it the most automated way. Thanks. --Stefan talk 04:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate the thought
After Good article reassessment/Beaujolais wine/1, I'll probably take a backseat in regards to GA nominations and responding to reviewers. It takes away a bit of time from content writing, which is of a greater interest to myself. I appreciate the thought and effort that you are putting in with nominating these articles. The confidence that you have in the "GA quality" of them means a lot to me, even if they don't ultimately end up with that little green plus sign. AgneCheese/Wine 23:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, it looks like a need to have a look at what's happened in the last few days when I've mostly been busy with Easter vacation. While it's always possible that an article has a few issues in the eyes of a different reviewer, I'm surprised that this article seems not to have passed! I've rather had the feeling that we keep the requirements for B and above a bit higher than the enwiki-wide standard. Actually, I haven't been systematically combing the project's articles (or your contributions specifically) for GAs, but Beaujolais wine looked very GA-worthy when I stumbled across it. The stumbling happened when I was responding to the Grand Cru question. I noticed that you had put in a concentrated effort some time ago, and it looked like you were finished and that it had been stable for a while. Tomas e (talk) 10:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Appellation d'Origine Contrôlée wines
Hello Tomas,

I definitely finished the french version of the article "List of Appellation d'Origine Contrôlée wines". You can read my suggestions for the english version of the article in the article's discussion page (I removed my long former message and wrote a new one). I think you'll be glad with my decision to exclude the local designations of the "Alsace grand cru" AOC. Kind regards... 343KKT Kintaro (talk) 07:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello, I'll definitely have a look at it some time. It absolutely is something of a "monster list" (and valuable reference) with a lot of different interpretations possible on "what is a separate appellation and what is just an additional label designation within the appellation" due to regional differences, such as lieux dits in Alsace or climats in Bourgogne village or premier cru. Tomas e (talk) 13:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok friend, thanks for your attention. In the case of the 51 lieu-dit denominations of the "Alsace grand cru" it is obvious that they are not AOC labels since they don't appear as AOC -but as subordinate denominations- in the INAO (official) website. They don't even appear in the 2004 arrêté from the "Journal Officiel" (official aswell). I was then wrong concerning those labels. Nevertheless the 2004 arrêté (the last one in regrouping the whole ensemble of french AOC wines, liqueurs and spirits) counts more AOC wines than the INAO website, the Burgundy region wines are a good example of that (but there are other examples). I think the INAO website doens't show this whole ensemble of official AOC labels, but I don't know why. I'll ask directly to this official institution (INAO) and if I obtain an answer I'll report it to you (if you are interested in, are you ?) Kind regards. 343KKT Kintaro (talk) 10:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I have had the same experience with searching online at INAO here; sometimes you don't seem to get all the hits you expect. I was thinking that perhaps not everything has been published electronically, if it hasn't been changed recently? Tomas e (talk) 18:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again, I called the INAO today (I live in Paris and their bureau is also in Paris... not an expensive call). After having looked for the right person, a guy explained me how does work the website and why the 2004 arrêté shows more AOC labels than the site. First of all you should know that the website is correct concerning AOC labels "strictu senso". The arrêté icludes some denominations mixed with the independent AOC labels themselves. The fact is that in commerce some denominations from certain AOC are more famous than the AOC itself, that's why they appear in this arrêté. The legal texts (in other words other official arrêtés) which prove they are not AOC by their own are in the INAO website. For example : click in "Produits" (left side of the INAO web page) and in "Liste des AO, IGP, LR". By clicking in "Appelations" and looking for "vins" (it's 4.1 in "Type/Catégorie", "Recherche de produit" must be empty) you will obtain 340 AOC labels. If you do the same but clicking on "Dénominations" you obtain 1371 labels (the 340 AOC plus their subordinate denominations) and if you click on "Produits" and you look for the result you obtain 3022 products (firms, producers, marcs, commercial labels etc) all of them subordinated to their denominations and AOCs... If you do the same research but with "Bourgogne" instead of an empty space in the "Recherche de produit" area then you don't obtain any legal text by clicking in "AOC" or "Denominations", you obtain the legal texts by looking for the list of products (click in "Produits"). Then appears, on the right side of every product name, the last legal text which says if yes or not it's an independent AOC. But we should obtain the same result by choosing "Appelations" in every research (340 labels as I told you). Little problem : this afernoon the website showed a result of 318 AOC wines, and now the number it's 340... Did they updated the website because of my call ? Who knows... In that case you could be right when you say "I was thinking that perhaps not everything has been published electronically". Regards. 343KKT Kintaro (talk) 23:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Quite interesting. And easy to understand why some secondary sources give different results... Tomas e (talk) 16:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Tom Stevenson
I have nominated Tom Stevenson, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Tom Stevenson. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. αѕєηιηє t/c 17:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)
The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Good work!
Another satisfied soul in the world of wine. "Why Shiraz? Why not Syrah?" AgneCheese/Wine 05:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Good to see that some people read it and even belive it! :-) It's good to have a sourced and reasonably complete and up-to-date version of Syrah's origin and naming history. Although, when I see the quote I'm reminded that the language of that section is a bit clumsy, and that much of the text on styles and production in various countries would benefit from a major rehaul. Tomas e (talk) 14:29, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Nice work...
...on Cahors (wine). It's looking a lot better. Lesgles (talk) 02:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Always fun when someone actually reads the articles. :-) Tomas e (talk) 19:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Costières de Nîmes
Quote: Having received several awards, including the André Simon Memorial Award and the Glenfiddich Award,[1] it has been described as "the most useful wine book ever published",[3] and "the one essential book for any wine-lover".[4] The book is so well-established as a definite reference concerning wine that many have expressed surprise about how recently the first edition was published.Endquote

I thoroughly agree with  you  Tomas. It's very confusing, particularly where it  concerns a large sub-region (if it can be called tha). The move makes sense, particularly in the characteristics of the wine as I  know them (CdN and Languedoc) well. I would suggest that the Oxford as a major publication and a recent edition is the more reliable source and the most recent in print. This, together with the fact that CdN is clearly shown unambiguously on the official vins-rhone site gives us two sources so it would appear to conclude the issue - with the exception that we are unable to publish a date for it (is it critical?). The Langedoc website still claims it to  be theirs, but  maybe their webmasters have not yet  been informed of the move. Possible.Kudpung (talk) 20:33, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll see if I have more time to look into this in a couple of days. Actually, last year, two of my former colleagues put some money into a Costières de Nîmes vineyard which sold shares. "It's in Rhône", they said. "No, it's in Eastern Languedoc" I said after having checked my World Atlas of Wine (2001 Ed). So therefore I'm a little extra interested in getting it right this time... :-) Tomas e (talk) 20:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)L
 * ==The Langedoc website== I referred to was not the official one. The official CIVIL site does not show CdN on their map, the first vinyards going west are Sommières and Muscat de Lunel. Inter Sud de France (like the Inter Rhone for the Rhone valley) was created on the 30 June 2006, grouping syndics from Languedoc (including CIVL), Roussillon, and Oc, now representing the world's largest winemaking region covering for 30% of the production in France - a smart marketing move for which, IMHO, the appelations were in great need of recognition after improvements in quality in the 1990s. My grapes were unaffected by the move and that's why I never heard about it. I'm not so sure it's critical to include the actual date on the Wiki page, but as I can't get hold of anyone at Inter Rhone, I have been in touch with Thierry Mellenotte at CIVL and am awaiting a response. Kudpung (talk) 07:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * ==PS - from the French Wikipedia:==

''Un des secrets de fabrique ; le sol caillouteux appelé gress sur lequel pousse cette vigne. Difficile de ne pas se tromper mais cette appellation appartient bien à la Vallée du Rhône et pas à la région Languedoc. Située à l’extrême sud-ouest de la Vallée du Rhône, juste au dessus de la Camargue, cette appellation produit principalement des vins rouges...'' Kudpung (talk) 09:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Traminer
Hi Tomas, sorry it's taken a while to get back to you, I've got thoroughly distracted by the Italy Project recently.... On the Savagnin/Traminer front, I think I did it that way because there was more to the Savagnin article at the time, and to be fair it's slightly more commonly seen in the UK that simple "Traminer". But I'm not arguing with a generic article on the Traminer family, in which case you should merge in the stuff from the Savagnin article IMO, there's some good papers there on variations across the Alps and so on. As it happens, I didn't take anything from the OCW for that article, to be honest it's the one article I've ever written where I was uncomfortable about how close it was to WP:OR, starting with Galet for basic ampelography, I looked at lots of original scientific papers etc and wrote down the only "story" that seemed to make sense to me. It was then nice to read OCW and find that Jancis had come up with the same story. :-)) I'm a geneticist by training, so I'm much more comfortable reading the original papers - and I just find it interesting. On the "red" front, the main argument for it being a white -> red mutation is the fact that there's many different white Traminers, but apparently only one red one. And AFAIK, there's no "noir" mutant, what we call "red" Traminer is in fact a "gris" mutant. (qv the Pinots, the Grenaches etc) Which is indeed a single mutation away from the "blanc" form, and while gris->blanc is more often seen, there are gris mutants of eg Chardonnay, and since Traminer seems to have a relatively unstable genome, I have a feeling that what we've seen is a transposon coming out of one of the "colour" genes. There are plenty of "ancient" white varieties - the muscats, malvasias, Gouais Blanc etc. I'll have a bit more of a think on your article when I've some time, but on two specific points - there still seems to be a bit of controversy on Gewurz as a musqué mutant, although that may well be the Germans not differentiating between Gewurz and red Traminer in their own collections. I'm surprised that noone seems to have found the musqué gene yet. And the VIVC doesn't treat Gewurz and Rot as the same variety (they have separate entries), but they list synonyms if at any time in history the name has been applied to that genetic material, which thanks to previous confusion, is true in this case. I'm still surprised that I couldn't find any more DNA work on the Traminers in the Alps, I would have thought the Austrians would have done something on that, and it sounds like there may be quite an interesting story there - an unstable grape planted in lots of isolated little valleys is a good recipe for interesting genetics. :-) Cheers FlagSteward (talk) 12:42, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that - I hadn't realised that you'd checked grape genetics papers directly - impressive! Since you've produced a genetics argument to back up why the white Traminer should be older than the red variety, I'll stick to that story, but I remain unconvinced about reliable grape identifications from written sources dating back to the year 1000 (in Tramin). About the German way at looking on the Traminer family - it was actually a German online source which made me aware of the division into three varieties following Galet, although the list of allowed varieties simply treats Roter Traminer and Gewürztraminer as the same thing. It's not really urgent to get the article public, I'll continue on it when I have some time over. Tomas e (talk) 17:19, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * On another note, I'm unable to find separate entries for Gewürztraminer and Roter Traminer in VIVC. If we discount odd synonyms such as "Traminer Gris" with a single holding institute, there seem to be the following Traminers in the database:
 * TRAMINER ROT, 12609, which probably mainly refers to Gewürztraminer holdings, since this entry covers holding institutions all over the world.
 * SAVAGNIN ROSE, 10797, with just 3 holding inst.
 * TRAMINER WEISS, 12611, with 16 holding inst.
 * SAVAGNIN BLANC, 10796, with 18 holding inst.
 * Tomas e (talk) 17:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

CdN
I haven't had a reply from the CIVL, can we concur that the article has sufficient evidence as it stands? Kudpung (talk) 09:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I don't see any need to change it to satisfy. However, if some other editor takes an interest in the article has a source which says "it's in Languedoc" it would have been better to have a reference saying who decided exactly what and when to move Costières de Nîmes from one region to another. Otherwise you always run the risk of conflicting edits. So I'm still curious, but obviously your Wiki-edit time would be better spent improving other articles than chasing this down further... Tomas e (talk) 11:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

CdN, we now have the source
Received this today: "En 1989, les producteurs de cette appellation représentés par le syndicat des producteurs de Costières de Nîmes ont souhaité être rattaché aux AOC de la Vallée du Rhône.

Cette décision s’est prise parce que cette appellation avait des terroirs et une typicité de vins plus proche des AOC de la Vallée du Rhône que de ceux du Languedoc. (Elle a plusieurs communes en commun avec l’AOC Côtes du Rhône).

Sincèrement,

Jérôme VILLARET Directeur Service Economique & Administration Générale INTER RHONE"

So it would appear that it goes back in fact to 1989, even longer than I suspected, and before I began growing in the region - Eighteen years for those that have not yet updated their wine books... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kudpung (talk • contribs) 13:31, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Excellent! And a good case to show why checking more or less original sources is a good idea when you compile an encyclopedia! :-) As for 18 years - it's actually not the only change from ther 1980s that some wine writers have missed - I've e.g. seen prominent writers who still think that Crémant stand for sparkling wines with a lower pressure, which was the case when the term was used in Champagne. Tomas e (talk) 13:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I am steadily progressing with my project for individual pages for the more prominent Rhône wines and carefully checking original sources for up-to-date information. I have been on tasting panels with prominent wine writers, and although their olfactory memory and terroir recognition is extraordinary, I have often been surprised at their lack of background information. But they do cover many enormous regions. My own feats at tasting outside the Rhône region are mediocre.118.175.130.58 (talk) 06:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Coteaux de Pierrevert AOC
I have deleted this from the Rhône wine page. It is a Provence wine. No article exists yet, if I get time I will start a stub.Kudpung (talk) 14:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Alsace wine
How do you think our Alsace wine article holds up to this Alsace wine FAQ? AgneCheese/Wine 16:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, overall the level coverage is roughly on the same level. It doesn't look like he's sourced his material from us, though. He's a bit lighter on statistics and official regulations (which tend to often be the dry result when I start to chase down references), but has more advice, which is probably helpful to most people who plan to drink the stuff, but inevitably POV. (For newbies I would have left out Zind-Humbrecht though, although the few bottles they produce are very fascinating.) It has one big drawback, though, and that is not discussing the slightly controversial and confusing issue of sweetness in Alsace wine in a more complete way. (David Schildknecht recent did so here, available to those who pay money to "Big Bad Bob", and I might add info from that article at some future point.) While Alsace Riesling often is dry, PG and Gewürz are often not, and neither are Zind-Humbrecht wines. But our Alsace coverage could definitely be expanded. Tomas e (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

south tyrol
That is totally uncalled for what you did, you should and must respect other's edits and assume good faith. Can you please put them back? I am very familiar with the history and I took care in updating the wikilinks, and maintaining correct historical accuracy. I am rather shocked that you would revert wikilink corrections, like at Deidesheim, Obergurgl. Those are proper and correct edits. I don't mean to be harsh, because we can make this a friendly/professional discussion, but that is vandalism what you did, and you should ask for clarification before reverting edits. 96.251.12.214 (talk) 21:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll reply on your talk page. Tomas e (talk) 08:10, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Grape cultivars
Hello Rkitko, I saw that you followed up my comment in the edit summary for Bacchus (grape) and restored the article's tag for WikiProject Plants. It's interesting that you want all cultivars tagged as well, because most articles on grape varieties (that's what the cultivars are always called in the wine industry) are for the moment not tagged for the Plant project, as far as I know. (That was why I thought the tag would also be irrelevant for Bacchus.) I made a quick check of the grape articles we've tag as top importance. The (species) article Vitis vinifera is unsurprisingly tagged, but none of the articles for major varieties such as Chardonnay, Riesling or Pinot Noir are. So, if you really want them in the Plants project, I would suggest going through the 300+ articles in Category:Grape varieties to round up a couple of hundred additional articles. Seems like gnome or bot work... Tomas e (talk) 16:19, 28 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi there! Thanks for the note. Indeed the scope of WP:PLANTS includes all cultivars. I initially tagged all the articles with BotanyBot, but must have missed the grape variety subcategory. We certainly cover major cultivars from other species (see anything in ), so I see no reason we shouldn't also tag these. I'll have BotanyBot do a quick run. Thanks for bringing the big ones to my attention! I hadn't realized this had been skipped. WP:FARM may or may not also overlap here, but I don't know how far their scope extends; it may not include viticulture. Thanks again! Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 21:50, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Commandaria
Thanks for updating the lead section. However, the lead should summarize the entire article so you need to add information like production and authentication into the lead. OhanaUnitedTalk page 13:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I updated a previous statement I did which I found out to be incorrect. I agree with you that the lead could be more extensive, but although I spend a lot of time on wine articles in general, I have only added a very small part of this article so I'm not sure if I'm the best one to do it. Tomas e (talk) 14:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Cork taints
No I can not confirm at all, I copied the text from Cork taint since I though that more explanation was needed in Alternative wine closures. Remove or reword if you think it is wrong, I did not trace it to who did the update in Cork taint to see if it was reliable. --Stefan talk 14:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, then I suggest we rewrite using that value and the source, I will do it over the weekend unless you beat me to it. --Stefan talk 00:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, I removed and reworded the texts, please review and update. I'm not happy with the cites in "the cork-industry group APCOR cites", but not sure how to make it better. Thanks! --Stefan talk 00:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Tetrahydropalmatine
Hi there. I just cut and pasted the name from the PubChem entry for the compound, with complex molecules like this there are generally several ways of naming it that would both be correct (depending which end you start at etc.) although it does seem unusual that the PubChem and Mesh entries are different. Also I notice that the Swedish version of the article has quite a lot of extra information in there, I don't suppose you would be able to add anything to the English version? I would do it myself but my Swedish language skills are unfortunately limited! Meodipt (talk) 02:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I stumbled across the Swedish version when browsing through a category of articles (neurotransmitters, I think) and noticed that a) it had no interwiki and b) the systematic name was onviously wrong since it ended in "...benzo" or something like that. That was why I found "your" article. I'll have a look if I can make some additions of things that seem credible. Tomas e (talk) 08:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)
The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Romanesti (winery)
I added a comment to what you added. Chergles (talk) 14:42, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Tokaji
Greets! I did do that, because I enough the lies, that the Slovaks always want steal our historical figueres and cultures...Sorry than.

Sincerely: Peter This comment was added by MagyarTürk (MagyarTürk) 17:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC) under a different heading and was moved here its own heading.


 * Hello, when we write our encyclopedia, we strive for correctness based on reliable sources. Since there exists an agreement that the Tokaj name can also be used in a small part of Slovakia, the article on the very fascinating wine Tokaji will remain listed in Category:Slovak wines as well. You may wish to refer to WP:NPOV and WP:NOT. Regards, Tomas e (talk) 11:05, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Greets. Vandalism is in your dream. You forgot that "Slovakia" was Hungarian land (historical always with lot of Hungarian population) until 1920. That's land was and still made and make by Hungarians there. The EU didn't allow their called it "Slovak" or something like this...Just thinking a bit.

Best regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MagyarTürk (talk • contribs) 13:03, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

The Judgment of Paris 30th Anniversary
No one has opposed your suggestion to merge The Judgment of Paris 30th Anniversary into the 'parent' article so I would go ahead and do it whenever you feel like it. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 12:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Okidok, may do when there's a rainy day. :-) Tomas e (talk) 16:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)
The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Swedish Military History and ranks
Thank you for your ideas regarding my articles on Swedish ranks. The purpose of those pages is to explain each rank in detail about what they currently represent as well as providing a historical dimension. Also, I am striving to facilitate the browsing between ranks. A merge with another large article would make that article huge (considering that it may contain all ranks in the world) with too much detailed information. Also, the browsing functionality will get lost. A better way is to put short notes with references into my articles. Other reasons are of more administrative nature: Having references make articles independent, which makes it possible to relink to other ranks as translation changes. For example, with the introduction of a new ranking system, ranks will be redefined. Changing references then would be much easier than rewriting huge articles. Also consider the situation where one rank corresponds to several Swedish ranks or vice versa. I am removing your merge requests by now! OK? Best Regards, Malin --Malin Randstrom (talk) 08:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
 * btw, I love wine but I am not an expert so your articles help me a lot -- fantastic job.
 * Hello, although I suppose I wrote merge suggestions to the corresponding English terms (Överste -> Colonel and so on) wouldn't an expanded article with the ranks of the Swedish Armed Forces rather than Military ranks of the Swedish Army be a better idea? In such an article, the Swedish and corresponding UK/US terms could sit better side by side, and the insignia of the various services could be compared. I think that explanations of training and recruiting sits better in such an article than one on an individual rank. My concern is that a separate article on a Swedish language term for a rank existing in other countries/languages may be seen as wiktionary stuff, and that separate articles on each military rank in each country around the world may possibly be seen as non-notable by some. Also, always nice to know that some of the wine articles are read. Regards, Tomas e (talk) 16:26, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * did as you suggested: A brief outline of ranks on the Swedish Armed Forces article. Also, I added a paragraph "Capacity of the Army" on the very same article to show "WHAT Army!" -- as the Army hardly exits. --Malin Randstrom (talk) 06:10, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, will have a look to see if I can give a hand, but it may take a while since I enjoy vacation in Sweden for the moment. I will not disagree with you when it comes to the present size of the armed forces :-). Although I would argue that most army units still existing 15-20 years ago were hollow, hardly equipped and mostly useless. However, the phenomenon is unfortunately known in a wider range of European countries, if not all of them... Tomas e (talk) 23:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)
The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)
The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

a Q about Kerner
Hei Tomas. I was wondering if you could help me get my head around the Kerner creation date confusion, since some sources state surely that it was developed in 1929, while suprisingly many believe it was bred in 1969, and even make a point of its late arrival, like but surely this is old and has been corrected?. Do you know why this is and does it help to speak German? Cheers, M URGH   disc.  12:59, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think this is a case where OCW and Jancis' writer actually have confused the date of creation with the varietal protection and/or date of release, i.e., Sortenschutz and Rebsortenliste in German. Even the sun has its spots and not even OCW is infallible. :-) Presumably only reference plantations of Kerner existed for most of the time between 1929 and 1969, and experimental plantation towards the end. I consider VIVC, reference 1, a more authorative source than OCW on these issues. I don't have any written source literature for the varietal protection; I've picked them from dewiki (de:Kerner (Rebsorte)) and Wein-Plus Glossar (ref 2), which is partially log-in. Since dewiki, although of generally high quality, uses inline references rather little, it's a bit unclear where the info on years were taken from. Tomas e (talk) 23:16, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It's ok to catch them every once in a while ;) But this online text is from 99, they must have corrected it in recent versions. I'm curious to look at some different books on this.. M URGH   disc.  01:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * As I remember it, the 2006 edition of OCW states the same info, because when you asked the question this disparancy rang a bell. I'll check on it later today. Tomas e (talk) 07:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Interesting. I'd be curious what that other Robinson other book Vines, Grapes and Wines says too. And Stevenson's explanation.. My current nearby library isn't great, but I hope I remember to check next chance I get at a good one. M URGH   disc.  12:45, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The 2006 OCW text is very close to the 1999 version; plantation data have been updated and moved to another sentence and a few words changed, but the statement about the origin is exactly the same. Do you think there's a bottle of wine awarded for every error in OCW that you report to the editors? :-) Tomas e (talk) 21:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I certainly hope so! I thought what the hell and dropped her a line, and she responded quite promptly saying she found it interesting and placed a German-speaking assistant on the case, so I guess we'll see.. I'd be quite content with the reward of a year's subscription to her site, mind you ;^) M URGH   disc.  00:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I got some responses from Mrs. Robinson and her associate Julia Harding with thanks for bringing it to their attention. You were right on the money. JH wrote they would correct the information in the 3rd (and future) editions of the Oxford Companion, with the ambiguity coming in their use of the word ‘bred’,.. quoting:
 * (a) The original crossing that created Kerner was made in 1929. (b) For such crossings (now EU wide), there is also a date on which the new variety is granted ‘Sortenschutz’ (literally ‘variety protection’) and released for commercial production, which is a bit like patenting or copyrighting. For Kerner this was in 1969. As a point of comparison, the original Scheurebe crossing was created in 1916 but not given ‘Sortenschutz’ until 1956.

So though there was no mention of lavish rewards, it was a very nice response. M URGH  disc.  21:23, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Wine
Oops. It looks like I unintentionally plonged in the middle of some kind of Slovakian – Hungarian wine war. I restored the categories. Doesn't have any opinion on th~is subject. Warrington (talk) 20:43, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Didier Dagueneau
Dear Tomas e: Thanks for your help with the above article. It's been a couple years since I did serious Wikiing, and it's gotten a lot more technical! Wnissen (talk) 00:04, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! I was browsing through Decanter online and saw this item, where one of the comments specifically said "There is nothing on Didier Dagueneau on Wikipedia – it would be great if someone who really knew him and his wines could add him to Wikipedia" so I of course had a look. And I noticed that you had started an article, but that it could need a little copyediting. Very sad news though. Tomas e (talk) 08:37, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Moldavian wineries
Help me evaluate those prods--where did you look for notability and not find? Please reply on my user talk page DGG (talk) 02:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

List of German wine regions
Hey Tomas, I've been working on a few "list of ... wine region" articles (Kinda like Spanish wine regions) and I just finished the one of Germany's wine regions. Given the complexity of Germany's different classifications, this was a bit of a headache. I finally decided to organize it based on Anbaugebiet, Bereich and Grosslage with a small section on the table wines. I thought that the Grosslagen were worthwhile to include since they (along with the Einzellagen) seem to be the most confusing aspects of a German wine label. I don't see in the future there being articles on any the Grosslagen so one of these days I'll probably get around to making redirects of them to this list. That way if a reader searches for one of these names that are on a wine bottle they'll be directed this page and at least have some context about what it is. I was wondering if you (and I'll probably ask Symposiarch too) would look over the article for spelling/capitalization/general errors/etc and also consider what location names should be wiki-linked. I was tempted to go into more detail about what major cities are within a particular bereich but held off. Thanks! AgneCheese/Wine 01:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like a good effort! I may go over it for some minor changes. Since the Tafelwein and Landwein regions are a very minor phenomenon on the export market (and for in principle all quality wines), we could possibly simplify the article by focusing the lead on the Quality regions and introduce the others as a special case. Now when this article exist, I wouldn't really mind moving the table in German wine to shorten and simplify the main article, but I do think the tabular format is necessary for comprehension. (It took more than a little head scratching to compile the darn table, since some names had been changed and added after my printed source was published.) Tomas e (talk) 08:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, another sort of "mini-objective" for this new article was to act as a splinter from the main German wine article. I think the German wine article has a lot of potential to possible reach FA but I do think we need to incorporate more splinters to try and get the size more manageable. (One of these days I'll get around to a History of German wine). Thanks for your time! AgneCheese/Wine 16:11, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * ...which sort of reminds me that I compiled content for a history of Alsace wine section/article some months ago by writing down key phrases from two(?) OCW articles but sort of never got around to finish it. Tomas e (talk) 16:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)
The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

News maps of wine

 * Hello Lofo7, I just noted your wonderful maps of French wine regions. I've included some of them in articles in English Wikipedia, where I'm active in WikiProject Wine. Since we have rather few wine-specific maps, and even fewer really good ones, I'm wondering if you're interested in continuing your excellent work? Even if you're only interested in maps of French wine regions, there are several more that would be valuable to have as maps of the same style as those you have made so far. Champagne would be my priority one, if you're open to requests, but I can name several more. :-) By the way, i just created Category:Wine maps and included your maps in that category. Best regards, Tomas er 21:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, two news maps of wine here : and here :

Champagne and Languedoc-Roussillon coming soon. ;) Regards !--Lofo7 (talk) 22:52, 8 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Wonderful! Nice to see that you've started a new "run" of wine maps. Tomas e (talk) 23:12, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * AWESOME! Thank you Lofo! And thank you, Tomas for seeking these out. AgneCheese/Wine 03:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)
The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:10, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Typo correction resulting in broken link
Thanks for bringing my error to my attention. I really do want to know about them. I am aware this is not a good change, but I guess I blew this one. I don't use bots for my work, but then my name is not Jesus, either. Will try to get my error rate under .01% like every one else's :) -LilHelpa (talk) 16:41, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Christianity and alcohol
I'd still be interested to hear your suggestions in response to my reply to you at Talk:Christianity_and_alcohol. --Fl e x (talk/contribs) 03:53, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Will do sometime... :-) Tomas e (talk) 21:48, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)
The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)