Jump to content

Talk:Heineken brands

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comment

[edit]

Why are the North and South American brands they own not listed like the others? I know of the Tecate, Bohemia, Sol, Dos Equis company and of the 50% of Lagunitas, are there others?(173.62.187.160 (talk) 00:44, 12 December 2015 (UTC))[reply]

"Approximately 57557" That's an approximation? 212.140.139.225 14:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Birra Moretti

[edit]

The guidance on Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), specifically WP:PRODUCT is that the products and services of a company should be contained in an "article that deals with all of the company's products and services". As such I am proposing that Birra Moretti be merged into Heineken brands in the section Heineken brands#Birra Moretti. The Birra Moretti is small now that the football tournament, Birra Moretti Cup, has been removed. The information contained in the article can be contained in Heineken brands#Birra Moretti. If the section grows that will be the time to break out in summary style. SilkTork *SilkyTalk 18:41, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose There should and can be a separate Birra Moretti page. Especially considering that this brand has become quite popular in the US recently. For example, just as Volvo is a brand of Ford Motor Company, it is not listed as Ford Motor Company brands#Volvo or Ford Motor Company#Volvo. The biggest impression I got after seeing your initial modifications was that you only ended up taking rich articles and making them short and boring. Sorry to be blunt. :-) Icsunonove 20:56, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get your point about taking "rich" articles and making them "boring". Is this a genuine comment or simply bad feeling? If it's a genuine comment that you feel I have deleted valid and valuable material I'd like to hear a fuller explanation so I can look again to see if you're right. If it's just bad feeling, all I can do is apologise that I've upset you in some way. That was not my intention. I'm looking to make Wiki a credible, readable and useful reference tool. I like to think I follow Wiki guidelines which are based on the consensus of experienced editors. If I take a course of action that someone points out is not Wiki policy I stop doing it. There are times when a course of action is borderline, and someone challenges it and there is a discussion to see how the action best fits existing guidelines, or if there is a need to create new ones. This may be one of those borderline cases. We are looking to see the best course of action to take based on existing guidelines. We disagree on the best course of action. That, to me, is all that is happening. "Short and boring" indeed! Ouch! SilkTork *SilkyTalk 22:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lets keep it short and sweet. The guidelines, that I feel you have misinterpreted, certainly do not suggest that we make Volvo, Saab, Jaguar, Mazda, etc., etc. all redirects to subcategories of their respective parent companies. Where you would group brands would be taking something like Dell computers and then having their product lines/brands like Inspiron, Latitude, etc. in the overall Dell article. You'll notice that is actually the case of how they are organized, and I am concerned for your editorial safety if you try to start clumping them all together in one article. :-) You haven't offended me, but my personal opinion is simply that the original article was at least interesting and something that could be built upon -- where making a paragraph hidden inside a huge Heineken article is certainly boring (to me). A company like Moretti has a long an independent history; it isn't like Mountain Dew that was an invention of Pepsico, but by golly, that brand has a page too! :-) So please do review the examples I've made again about automobile marques, and also the Dell product lines, and then continue the debate. :-) regards, Icsunonove 06:57, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I've removed the merge tag. It may be worth your while, however, reading the guidelines carefully. I know there are a lot of them and they can be difficult to absorb (I don't think anyone knows them all off by heart!), however you might be missing the essence of why I proposed the merge; and a cup of tea and a jolly good read of the guideline may assist you in understanding my thinking. Your argument about cars is covered by Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#Notes, which indicates that certain cars have notability because they have had a book written about them: "All cars that have had Haynes Manuals written about them satisfy this criterion." If Birra Moretti had a book written about it we wouldn't be having this discussion. The guidelines, while open to interpretation in places, are quite clear that if a topic has been the subject of a book by a reliable publisher then the topic is notable. Our problem here is that the brewery Birra Moretti hasn't been, as far as we are aware, the subject of a book. The brand of beer may have, but we are not talking about the brand of beer, which you have to admit is no longer made at that plant anyway! It's also worth looking at this discussion Wikipedia talk:Notability (breweries) in which we went through questions as to what makes a brewery notable, and how we should approach the matter. Such topic notability guidelines are now being played down in favour of using as few as possible in case some of these topic guideline start to give conflicting advice. I understand your feelings. When I first arrived on Wiki I set about creating many articles on breweries! Now I am trying to set things up in order to keep the same information, but in a manner which is acceptable to the Wiki guidelines and policies and general consensus. Bear in mind that several articles on breweries have been deleted when they've been brought up on AfD. At the moment they rarely get called up. I'm keen that before someone looks too closely that we abide by Wiki policy! Regards SilkTork *SilkyTalk 12:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Żywiec Brewery

[edit]

Oppose proposed merger of Żywiec Brewery with Heineken brands. While I don't mind merging the brand information, the Żywiec brewery article contains a history section, which does not belong to 'brands' and there is no reason to get rid of this information --Jotel 11:33, 1 October 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It's a valid point. Now we have to get together sources to satisfy WP:ORG#Primary_criterion. While the Żywiec brand may have some sources, does the Żywiec brewery? SilkTork *SilkyTalk 11:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've just had a quick look, and there's not a lot of info on the web. There's an interesting document on a trade union dispute between Heineken and the Żywiec group, and there's stuff (of course) on Żywiec Porter (Jackson loved it!), but there's nothing solid on the brewery itself. I'll take a look at my books tonight. SilkTork *SilkyTalk 11:36, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There is one ref. so far. And there is more, books &c, all in Polish AFAIK. I'll add more sources later. --Jotel 12:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A book, three articles from two different newspapers, a state archive collection - notable enough by now? --Jotel 17:23, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're doing well. It's unfortunate that three of the sources are in Polish. The guidelines do allow non-English language sources, though English is preferred. The English source you've got is the one that I mention above; it's not perfect for a notability source as the article is about the trade union dispute rather than the notability of the brewery itself. SilkTork *SilkyTalk 22:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There also is a link to an English page of state archives (mentioned in ext. links, as it's not used to illustrate a specific point). The brewery is in Poland, so it's hardy surprising the vast majority of sources are in Polish. This doesn't make the article less notable. --Jotel 06:39, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as well. It seems a waste of time to merge all these articles, especially these are historical companies now part of Heineken. They are not simply recent brand inventions. Icsunonove 20:58, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the desire of both of you to want to keep these articles as standalones. However, I would ask that you read through the guidelines WP:ORG and WP:N to see where the breweries meet the requirements. And also to bear in mind I am not suggesting we delete these breweries, merely move them into the context of the company of which they are a part. If there are substantial and interesting things to be be said about these breweries that also would be a good argument for keeping them as standalones, but currently there is not much to be said other than that they are brewing plants which make beer. However, I'm not here to make problems or upset anyone, so if you guys read the guidelines and still assert that you feel the breweries should be standalones I'll take down the merge tags - you currently have the consensus anyway! Regards SilkTork *SilkyTalk 22:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"currently there is not much to be said other than that they are brewing plants which make beer". That's definitely not true for Żywiec brewery. --Jotel 06:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I do a Google-USA search on "Birra Moretti", taking out hits to wiki, and receive well over 350,000 hits. I guess it is a bit known (i.e., notable). :-) [1] Their new parent appears to believe it fit for Moretti to maintain their own website as well www.birramoretti.it. Anyway, I think you'll find a more rich history captured on Wikipedia if you simply allow the stand alone articles of historical marques to mature (or at least leave articles in place such as Dr Pepper, Mountain Dew, etc., etc.) Icsunonove 07:05, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Birra Moretti is also a beer! That makes a ghit count difficult. Ghits are not sources anyway. Please see my comments above on reading through the guidelines to get a handle on what is and what is not considered notable. Keep well SilkTork *SilkyTalk 12:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:LNPLCogo.jpg

[edit]

Image:LNPLCogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:AlAhramLogo.jpg

[edit]

Image:AlAhramLogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BrandLogoNl.gif

[edit]

Image:BrandLogoNl.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

[edit]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 03:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cruzcampo Shandy.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Cruzcampo Shandy.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot, currently under trial --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:57, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Heineken brands. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:53, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ariana (beer). 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:38, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Heineken brands. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:20, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Heineken brands. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:07, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Heineken brands. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:31, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some financial results for this company would be very nice to see in the intro. (As InBev article has, for instance).

[edit]

I don't know how much is available, but even the basics of public vs. private ownership would be good. This is routine in articles about conglomorates, but missing here because people are really just interested in "who owns what" beer information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZeroXero (talk • contribs) 15:34, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bintang (Indonesia Beer)

[edit]

Isnt bintang also a Heineken branded beer in indonesisa?

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:36, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Russia

[edit]

Can i buy Heineken in Moscow? 2001:1C01:3A0B:4000:64E3:B910:78CA:CCCA (talk) 21:23, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Heineken_brands&oldid=1207610040"