Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/Wines task force/Category tree

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

Category:Grape varieties

[edit]
Current Sub categories Wanted names categories Sub Sub Sub Sub name
Category:Wine grapes of Greece Category:Grape varieties of Greece
Category:Wine grapes of Italy Category:Grape varieties of Italy Category:Wine grapes of Apulia, Category:Wine grapes of Campania,

Category:Wine grapes of Piedmont, Category:Wine grapes of the Veneto

Category:Grape varieties of Apulia and so on.
Category:Hybrid grape varieties
Category:Wine grapes of Croatia Category:Grape varieties of Croatia
Category:Grape varieties of Turkey Category:Grape varieties of Turkey
Category:Wine grape stubs

Comment: Think the name Grape varieties of X is better than Wine grapes of X, no matter what the parent and the child categories shall follow the same naming standard. --Stefan talk 00:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Grape varieties of X is a better way to go. Though looking at this list, the Italian grapes are the only ones that appear to have such heavy sub-division. I wonder how necessary this is? AgneCheese/Wine 19:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, I'm OK removing the italian subdivision, think it is a bit much, but not sure. --Stefan talk 00:16, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The more I ponder it, the more I wonder if it would be more fruitful to have broader sub-division rather than by smaller provinces. You would then only need about 4 sub cats instead of 21-like Category:Grape varieties of northwest Italy, Category:Grape varieties of southern Italy, Category:Grape varieties of central Italy and Category:Grape varieties of northeast Italy. Considering that there are 300 some Italian grape varieties, it would be worthwhile to have some sub-cats but we don't have to get so precise. While there are a lot of difference in the grape varieties of Piedmont versus Apulia, there is not that much difference in Apulia versus Basilicata, Campania, Calabria, etc. AgneCheese/Wine 00:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Comment: Think the name Grape varieties of X is better than Wine grapes of X, no matter what the parent and the child categories shall follow the same naming standard. --Stefan talk 00:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Grape varieties of X is a better way to go. Though looking at this list, the Italian grapes are the only ones that appear to have such heavy sub-division. I wonder how necessary this is? AgneCheese/Wine 19:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, I'm OK removing the italian subdivision, think it is a bit much, but not sure. --Stefan talk 00:16, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Should e.g. Category:Wine grapes of Italy contain only grapes that have originated in Italy or grapes that are grown in italy? As it is now it is stated in the category definition now it is all grapes grown in Italy, while Category:Grape varieties of Turkey and Category:Wine grapes of Greece seams to contain only local grapes (but not sure). I suggest that the categories should only contain grapes originated in that country/region? --Stefan talk 08:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the most part I agree except I think we should also uses the caveat of whether or not the grape is also strongly associated with the area. For instance, most evidence points towards Grenache originating in Spain but it obviously has a strong connection with France and should obviously be categorized both in Category: Grape varieties of Spain and Category:Grape varieties of France just as Syrah should also be both in France and Category:Grape varieties of Australia. This will require some judgement but I think it will be fairly easy to determine whether very common grapes like Cabernet Sauvignon and Chardonnay have a strong association with a region or was just planted there to be another international variety to market the wine of. AgneCheese/Wine 17:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agne lists some of the reasons why I'm actually somewhat skeptical about these categories. You would need clear inclusion criteria. Origin? Generally accepted origin? Sometimes claimed origin? Traditional region/country? Region/country where it is common? Region/country where it is allowed or appears at all? I assume there is more Cabernet Sauvignon than Canaiolo in Italy today, and Cab has certainly done more for Tuscany's modern fame... And Chardonnay seem to grow everywhere where there is weed... Well, you see the issue - the name of the categories don't really make it very clear what the inclusion criteria would be. In principle, I think that lists are better suited than categories to present such information. While the categories don't do much harm, they would become clumsy if they were created for all countries and liberal inclusion criteria were used... Tomas e (talk) 09:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but what to do, Delete the lot??? I doubt that would gain consensus, but maybe I'm pessimistic? I'm for deleting all italy sub categoris for sure. --Stefan talk 12:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree that this tricky terrain but I do think we need some sub-categorization of grape varieties. While we will need to keep a closer eye on how the international varieties like Cabernet and Chardonnay are categorizes, I do think it will be less ambiguous for 95% of our grape articles. There is little potential drama or controversy in putting Canaiolo in Category:Wine grapes of Italy, Touriga Nacional in Category:Wine grapes of Portugal, Dornfelder in Category:Wine grapes of Germany and so on. For the vast majority of grape articles, we will have very little trouble categorizing. For a few, the "strongly associated" clause will require some judgement but I don't think it will create any overbearing problems that couldn't be solved with a discussion on the article's talk page. AgneCheese/Wine 19:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Appellations and Category:Wine regions

[edit]

Trying to understand the writing for Wine region, does that mean that the category Category:American Viticultural Areas should be removed from Category:Wine regions of the United States since it is in Category:Appellations?? I agree if that is what you mean. I do not think any category should be in both the wine region category and the appellations category? (not saying that a page can not be classified in both) --Stefan talk


What about Formentera (Vino de la Tierra) and many other spanish regions that are both in Category:Appellations and in Category:Wine regions of Spain! Are they appellations or wine regions, or both? --Stefan talk 00:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]


And Category:Italian DOC should be a sub cat under Appellations? and Category:Italian DOCG a sub cat under Italian DOC?? --Stefan talk 00:47, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit tricky since the US uses the term appellation in a different manner than the rest of the world (of which, BTW, our current appellation article does a poor job of explaining). Broadly speaking American AVAs are wine regions rather than appellations, since the only distinction that separates one AVA from the other is simply its geographical boundary-unlike an AOC and DOCs where so much more comes into play with grape varieties, aging, etc. However, we do need to make a distinction between broad wine region articles like California wine, Sonoma County wine and individual AVAs like Alexander Valley AVA and Sonoma Coast AVA, etc. If project consensus leans towards individual AVAs being included as appellations to distinguish them from these broad regional articles, I would be okay with that. So, again, feel free to tweak away at any of the wording if it helps make things clearer. As for the Spanish wine articles, we actually need more specific category titles like Category:Spanish Vino de la Tierra to deal with those. AgneCheese/Wine 01:02, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would very much prefer to have another term than "appellations" used in the category structure to mean "any type of defined geographic origin for wine found on a label", because the informal English-language use of the term conflicts with its official French & EU use, which sometimes results in confusion, including terminology used in some enwiki articles. (The case in point is that French Vin de Pays has a region, department or zone indicated, such as VdP de Côtes de Gascogne, but they are definitely not appellation wines and if they were sold as such there would even be criminal charges for fraud!) Could we perhaps use the terminology of the article Protected Geographical Status, and call it something like Category:Wine with protected geographical status or possibly "indication" or "designation" instead of status? The article and terms deal primarily with the EU situation, but from my understanding many non-EU wine designations are also protected, at least in their home country. (But varying a lot in definition and requirements, which is why the actual name of a specific subset, "appellation", can be a misleading choice.) To me, this would be category which probably should mostly contain other categories named after their specific terms, e.g. AOCs, DOCGs, AVAs and so on. We would probably have to create additional subcategories, such as Category:Spanish DOs and Category:Portuguese DOCs, but in general, I think that would be a good move. Tomas e (talk) 10:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wine regions of X

[edit]

Suggest to standardize the naming of wine regions to Wine region of X, X is country as the top and under that whatever the region is called. Most follow this standard, but there are at least 3 big exceptions, Category:Wine regions of the United States that uses <state wine> such as Category:Arizona wine, Category:Wine regions of France uses Category:Alsace wine, Category:Bordeaux wine but many is missing, and finally Category:Wine regions of Italy that also contains categories of the type Category:Wines of Apulia, a few more might have the same naming standard, spain e.g. Comments? --Stefan talk 13:30, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. We need some sort of standardization and the "Wine region of X" format works fine. AgneCheese/Wine 18:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not quite sure if I understand what you propose to change - could you give some specific examples? I assume it is the name of the categories for regions? If you propose to change Category:Bordeaux wine to Category:Wine regions of Bordeaux I don't agree. Bordeaux is the region, and subordinate subjects are various types of articles related to Bordeaux wine, such as Category:Bordeaux wine producers and Category:Bordeaux AOCs. Tomas e (talk) 10:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that is what I propose, I propose to have a standardized name for the Wine regions of X categories. I propose that standard to be Wine regions of X. This standard is followed in some cases, see e.g. Category:Wine regions of New South Wales, Category:Wine regions of British Columbia but not for United states Category:Arizona wine, France Category:Alsace wine and Italy Category:Wines of Apulia, I suggest rename to Category:Wine regions of Arizona, Category:Wine regions of Alsace and Category:Wine regions of Apulia. --Stefan talk 12:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I do see your point! WP:NCCAT talks about topic categories and list categories, maybe the lowest category is a topic category and should be named in singularis e.g. Category:Wine region Bordeaux? Would that solve your issue? And does you have a issue only with France and/or when the region is the lowest or do you have an issue with the name even for Category:Wine regions of South Australia, that clearly could have many other regions as subcats. --Stefan talk 12:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

rename all members Category:Wine by country to Wine in country

[edit]

WP:Naming_conventions_(categories)#Categories by country states that "Categories of permanently located manufactured objects by country are named '... in country' ." there is also a "... of country" name that is e.g. used for fauna. Wine is not an object and is not really manufactured, but there is no other good option. Suggest that all members of Category:Wine by country should be renamed to <Wine in Country>. --Stefan talk 12:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that "in" is a good choice here, since this leads my thoughts to the wine market rather than the wine production. The subject of "Wine in Germany" includes a lot of French, Italian and Australian wine, while the subject "Wine of Germany" more clearly indicates "made in Deutschland". So wine by country is probably a better choice than wine in country. Tomas e (talk) 10:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fine with me! --Stefan talk 12:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename all <Country winemaker> to <Winemaker of country>

[edit]

See guideline WP:Naming_conventions_(categories)#Categories by country e.g. Category:Australian winemakers should be renamed to Category:Winemakers of Australia. --Stefan talk 12:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support per guideline. Man, the more I look at this category tree, the more I realized how far from the guidelines these cats have strayed. AgneCheese/Wine 19:17, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rename all <Country X> to <Country X> by guideline

[edit]

The WP:Naming_conventions_(categories) states that List_of_sovereign_states should be used for names, this means that America should be renamed to United States, British and English should be renamed to United Kingdom. --Stefan talk 12:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely would support the change to United States but there is more gray area with wines from the United Kingdom since there is some conflict over the distinction between "British wine" and "English wine". The Wine from the United Kingdom touches on this distinction but even then doesn't shed much light on the bubbling conflict underneath. While the change to the United States is pretty non-controversial, we should definitely take the United Kingdom related cats to WP:CfD. AgneCheese/Wine 19:23, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Viticulture and Category:Oenology

[edit]

Viticulture is on its own in the wine cat, Oenology is classified as a sub cat under Category:Wine terms. They should be treated in the same way, I find Wine to be over crowded now and would like to shrink it instead of growing it but do not really think that putting a category under a category like wine terms is correct. So I guess I suggest to promote Oenology up under wine directly. Comments? Any idea on how to make less categories inside wine. --Stefan talk 13:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that viticulture ("the outdoors" of winemaking) and oenology ("the indoors" of winemaking) should be treated in a similar way. Tomas e (talk) 10:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What about a category (not sure of the name? Category:Wine people or Category:People related to wine ) for all people related to wine, and move all categories that are on the top wine level now into it: Category:Wine critics, Category:Masters of Wine, Category:Sommeliers, Category:Vintners, Category:Wine writers, Category:Viticulturists, Category:Winemakers --Stefan talk 13:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree wholeheartedly on one "people" category directly under Category:Wine. Category:People related to wine would be fine with me, and so would Category:People connected to wine. Category:People in wine occupations would seem a possibility given Category:People in food and agriculture occupations, but I would prefer a broader definition than "occupation" to be able to include owners of wine estates and perhaps a few people who are notable in the wine sphere without having it as a occupation, such as major collectors/connoisseurs. A case in point is Hardy Rodenstock. Tomas e (talk) 10:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Created Category:People related to wine and moved Category:Wine critics, Category:Masters of Wine, Category:Sommeliers, Category:Vintners, Category:Wine writers, Category:Viticulturists, Category:Winemakers to it. --Stefan talk 15:15, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

One have to go, which? Suggest to keep Wine-related images. But what about the -?? Sigh. There is a Category:Images of beverages of which Category:Images of wine is part of and it have a category tree that makes sense, so I guess it is better?? So I suggest move all content of Category:Wine-related images into Category:Images of wine --Stefan talk 15:09, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I connected the two categories, added Wine-related images to the Images of beverages cat. Images of wine should really be deleted, but I will wait a while for input before I do that. --Stefan talk 13:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Removed all contents (one file only) from Category:Images of wine and tagged it for deletion. --Stefan talk 02:11, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

NB mostly my fault!

[edit]

I did most of the wine classification initial setup a few years ago, trying to make the few bits that were there consistent, and adding the AOCs and a bunch of other EUropean wine regions! Then I got rather busy and didnt finish, glad someone else has finally taken an interest! Will try to do some more work too! Justinc (talk) 11:58, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't take all that blame. That was a huge task to bite off for just one person! It is very easy to get overwhelmed with such a heady and multi-layered topic. Plus, overtime many different people "chipped in" by creating their own wine cats for 1 or 2 articles which contributed mightily to this hodgepodge. It will take a while for us all to sort everything out but it will be well worth it and consistent across the board. Your help and input is greatly welcomed and appreciated! AgneCheese/Wine 19:33, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Collection of things to do

[edit]

If you disagree just edit or question, be BOLD.

"Wine cats" listed at Redirects for discussion

[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Wine cats and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 10#Wine cats until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 05:24, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Food_and_drink/Wines_task_force/Category_tree&oldid=1185122384"