Talk:Beer style

Interesting page, but it is missing a list of styles and links. There is Rauchbier listed but no rauchbier link, but all of the miriad of ales that have lenghty pages are not mentioned, also none of the lagers other than Pilsner is mentioned.

Some styles that should have links even if they are not described: Ale: Porter, Stout, Imperial Stout, Pale Ale, India Pale Ale, Weissbier/Hefe Weizen (Wheat or white beer), Old Ale/Barleywine, Dubbel, Tripel, Quadrupel, Saison, Lambic, Gueuze, English Bitters, Extra Stong Bitters (ESB), Brown Ale, Kölsch, Scotch Ale, Scottish Ale,

Lager: Bock (Maibock), Doppelbock (Eisbock), Malt Liquor, Dortmunder, Dunkel Lager, Märzen/Oktoberfest,

Please feel free to add to this list, or work these links in to the article. - 12.20.127.229 14:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

OK what about Mild? IIRC there is a CAMRA-style group attempting to revive the appreciation and availability of Mild beers --John Stumbles 22:07, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Should there be a "beer style" category? --Michael K. Smith 18:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

There is: [1] — goethean ॐ 18:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Excellent work

I just wanted to let you know that. – ClockworkSoul 23:29, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Pilsner

If someone finds the time, make sure to add this.

Notability criteria discusion document

A discussion document has been opened up. Wikipedia:WikiProject Beer/Notability Criteria. Please put in your views either on the main page or on the attached talk page. If we want to list every brewery on the planet then I feel we should get some valid criteria behind us. SilkTork 16:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Wheat Beer

While this is an important style, it should be part of the list of styles as described above. This section as written was atrocious, simply a few sentence fragments, so I deleted it pending the aforementioned style list. An added note, that list probably should be textual with a short description of each, but not replace the individual style articles. A pure list would be redundant with the styles category. Couch 10:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Problems

I found this article to be frankly rather disappointing and in need of improvement. First, the section "Determining a beer's style" in its present form shows somewhat of an anti-American bias and as such is not NPOV. Second, I think any decent article on beer style should give some breakdown of the components of beer style, which would include not only type of yeast, but color, hop bitterness and aroma, gravity and attenuation, and additional ingredients; in fact I would consider this to be the real heart of the article, which might otherwise end up being little more than a list of beer styles. --Mwalimu59 21:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Style Authorities

There have been several modifications to the discussion of style authorities in the "determining a beer's style" section recently. I think including what authorities there are on this subject is important. A couple of notes:

• the words "for homebrewers" was recently added to some of this. I think that's not a very good idea because the general reader may not realize that homebrewed beer is every bit as much beer as commercial beer. If you don't know about the process, you might think that there's someway in which homebrewed beer isn't really beer, which is just false.
• The BJCP guideline and the BA guidelines are both used in the US quit a bit. Both should be mentioned. Should it be mentioned that for the most part, these guidelines reveal consensus about what styles there are?
• Are there really no recognized bodies that classify beers in Europe? (I guess that wouldn't be surprising to me, but I have to ask.)

philosofool 15:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I understand that there might be differences of opinion on some issues, but wouldn't it make more sense to discuss these first before modifying an article to match your opinion?

Your point regarding home-brewed vs. commercial beer seems to me absolutely invalid. How many people will experience a given home-brewed beer vs. a commerical one? Furthermore, home brewing, as I understand it, can and should be a creative process. Some of the most interesting beers to have come out of Belgium recently, for example, come from home brewers gone commercial who have no style book and have no interest in trying to duplicate a given style, even if they had a guide!

You say the BJCP and BA (who are they?) guidelines are "used in the US quite a bit". You however leave out by whom. I assume by home brewers. Isn't that who these style guides are for? And aren't these guidelines used primarily to judge home brews in competition?

The description of how styles come into being is already covered quite well in the current article. Furthermore it is covered universally, not just for American beers, but beers made anywhere.

And to answer your final question, no, there are no recognised groups in Europe (that I am aware of) that classify beers. Beers here have been brewed for hundreds of years and techniques are passed down from generation to generation. Mikebe 10:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

A few observations based on my own experience as a beer judge (which was admittedly has been a few years). First, it is not the job of a beer judge, BJCP or otherwise, to determine a beer's style, even though experienced judges may become quite good at it. Rather, a beer judge is given a style profile and has to judge how well particular beers are representative of the style; the contestant, not the judge, decides what style a beer should be entered as.

There is a committee on the BJCP that decides style guidelines to be used in AoB/AHA sanctioned competitions, and they are primarily use in the USA and Canada. Aside from the use in those competitions, I don't know how much they are recognized as any sort of highest authority. They try to be faithful to the traditions and origins of a beer style and its country of origin, but there is probably some degree of bias toward how the styles have been done in the American craft brewing industry.

See [2], especially [3], for additional information.

One more observation - Fifteen years ago, I was disappointed at how much the craft brewing industry was mostly sticking to the traditional beer styles. More recently, from what I've seen at beer fests and at the liquor stores, I've been much more impressed that some brewers have been "breaking the barriers" and inventing/experimenting with beer styles that aren't bound to traditions. --Mwalimu59 17:25, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

An interesting post. I quite agree with you that brewers ignoring style guidelines tend to be the ones making the most interesting and rewarding beers. IAC, as I said, I don't believe that the guidelines for home brewing or professional competitions have a place in the general beer articles in Wikipedia. In fact, for the people new to beer or new to beer information, these guidelines can be confusing and give entirely the wrong message.

I hope this discussion clarifies the issue and explains why the BJCP does not belong on this page. Mikebe 19:25, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Elements of beer style

Just did a major addition to the article discussing elements of beer style, replacing the section that had been titled "Determining a beer's style" (and incorporating some of the material that had been in that section). I'm sure some of the subsections can be improved, and some of the added material might be redundant with other sections of the article, so by all means please have at it. --Mwalimu59 03:19, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Box?

I think it would be neat and real helpful if someone perhaps added a box at the bottom of the page with all the different styles. We could also put the same box on all the individual pages of beer styles. It would enhance navigation and facilitate learning about different beer styles you may not be familiar with. I would be happy to do it myself but I'm totally swamped at work at the moment so it might take me awhile, let me know what everyone thinks. Also if this does happen is there a way do put the box on all the style pages at once? It might be time consuming to do it one by one. --BrokenStoic 05:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Beer style chart

With all due respect to its creator, I've removed the beer style chart because I feel that, as it stands, it's not accurate enough for inclusion. Specifically:

• Lambics are, by at least some sources, considered ales as the majority of fermentation happens on the top of the beer.
• "Belgian ale" isn't really a distinct style in and of itself, covering as it does such a wide range of styles -- the disposition of Saison is also a little odd.
• "Dark ale" is a bit dubious considering the continuum in practice between stouts, porters, and dark milds. Milds aren't represented at all on the chart.

I hope this will be taken as constructive criticism; the idea of a chart isn't bad in and of itself, but I don't think a strict hierarchy is the best way to present things.

My own lean would be toward a table with yeast type in one column and then base malt in the other; I don't have the books to hand right this instant second, but I seem to recall that some sources (Darryl Richman in Bock comes to mind first) argues that beers can be classified by base malt style (e.g. Bocks are all based on Munich malt, stouts always include roasted barley as the dominant specialty grain...). This strikes me as a natural method.

On the other hand, CAMRA, BJCP (*hides*) and Brewers Association all define beer styles in terms of three variables: yeast, original gravity, and color. Given that those three guidelines already all exist and more or less match, we can go with that to avoid accusations of WP:OR. --Stlemur 08:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I created this chart in order to be able to have a clear view about all the different types of beer around. Before making this chart I was very confused. Then I collected all the information I could about beer classification from Wikipedia articles and I made this chart. I don't expect to have understood everything properly, but I think a chart is clear enough to help people understand the complex world of beer styles.

First of all, my chart can't be considered an original work because I just re-arranged all the data that was already within Wikipedia: my work was just a (hopefully!) smart copy and paste. My only reference is Wikipedia. Since it was a big work of synthesis, there can be mistakes, but that's why I put it here, so we can discuss and improve it!

I will answer to the points of Stlemur:

• my starting point to create the chart is this article, Beer style. In the "Beer styles" section there is "lager" and "ale" (two separated generators of the chart), "lambic" is in a different section (if it were an ale, it would be within the "ale" section), the last section is "hybrid beers" that can't be classified just because they are hybrid. That is why the three main kinds from every other kind starts are lager, ale and lambic. Can we say that all the fermentation of all the lambic happens on the top of the beer?? if it does, then they are ales (and we'd better fix the article), if it does not for at least one lambic, then I think we'd better keep it as a different kind of beer.
• I agree about the fact that Belgian ale is not a kind of beer of its own, but you will agree with me that Abbey beer, Amber beer, [..], Trappist beer and Tripel are Belgian ales. It's like a trick to improve the output of the chart. The same for Dark ale: I have never seen "Dark ale" printed on any beer bottle, so I wouldn't say it's a kind of beer, but you might agree with me that Stout and Porter are Dark ales. Do you know what I mean?? if you have any idea about how to improve the general layout, it's absolutely welcome.
• from the Saison article, Saison is the name given to pale ales brewed in Wallonia, so I put it under pale ale in chart, what's odd with it?
• yes, I forgot to include Mild beers: tell me where it should be, and I will add it (of, if you can edit the SVG file, you can do it by your self :-)
• the chart might simplify the argument too much, but it will be very easy to understand. If we make a table or a list, it won't be clearer than reading the article itself. You can make a table as well, but I think a chart is much more useful.

When I have published this chart, I know it was going to start a discussion because I made a big work of synthesis and simplification. I expected this, and I like it because it will help me to have a better diagram: that's the way Wikipedia works, and there is nothing bad in it. If you want to express your opinion, you are absolutely welcome, but please, don't just say "I don't like it", but try to explain exactly what is wrong with it and suggest ways to improve it :-) Alessio Damato 17:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

What's odd about Saison is that it's a pale ale in that it's based on pale malt, but it's a Belgian ale in that it uses, or can use -- it's hard to state universals about a farmhouse style -- Belgian-style recipes (spices, candi sugar), Belgian-style fermentation (high temperatures, up to 30 degrees C) and Belgian strains of yeast (high attenuators). It's cases like this which I think rule out a strict single hierarchy, although a multiple chart -- one classifying by malt, one by yeast, one by geographic origin -- might have some merit. --Stlemur 19:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

In defense of the chart-maker, Saison is listed at the pale ale article (which is odd). The chart merely reflects the way we have described styles. — goethean ॐ 20:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

thanks goethean. I understood the point about Saison, I can't express an opinion because I didn't try any in my life and I hardly know it existed... according to what you told me and what I read on the relative article, it looks like it's a pale ale with some extra features, but it is still a pale ale, and so it deserves the place I have chosen. If you disagree with it, first change the beginning of the Saison article, pointing out that it is not a pale ale but it's own style, and I'll move it under "Belgian ales". I changed the diagram adding Mild, I hope you agree about where I placed it. Anything else to be fixed?? Alessio Damato 10:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

One of the problems with a fixed beer style chart is that it is difficult to embrace the complexities of the differing ways that beers are grouped. Saison is an ale made with pale malt and so is a pale ale. It has associations with Belgium, so people like to group it with Belgian beers. If the same beer is made in France people call it a Biere de Garde. Beers are sometimes grouped by country as well as by recipe or ingredients or colour. Such is the delightful muddle of beer classification! SilkTork 23:53, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

the chart is meant to give an overview, then any reader can get more precise information on the relative article. I wrote "Belgian ale" meaning all the particular ales that can't be classified as anything else and that were invented in Belgium. I can replace it with "Special ale" if you prefer, but then we should make a "Special ale" article (while Belgian ale alread exists).

About multiple names, I had the same problem with Wheat beer, that can be called white beer, bier blanche (is it spell right?), weissbier, weizenbier, etc. but it's the same thing. A user who is confused can go in the relative article to know more about it.

if you think any other way of classifying can be useful, we can make that as well, no problem :-), but I think a chart is the clearest thing. Alessio Damato 06:26, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

• I would like to see a chart of some kind, but from the drinkers' POV, not the brewer's. I would find it interesting, for example, if the chart showed two separate categories: 1. alcohol content 2. taste (bitter, sweet, sour). Most of the data for this kind of chart is easily available (the alcohol content, for example), however quantifying taste may be more difficult.

• As far as naming, I would recommend using as few names as possible -- perhaps more just general groups -- so as to keep it as simple as possible. Mikebe 14:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I thought this approach could be useful (that was the same approach of Wikipedia articles, even if nobody noticed it...) because, thanks to this, anybody can understand which kind of beer is drinking just looking at the label of the bottle and at the chart. Any other kind of classification is welcome, but I think we'd better try to work on finishing this existing chart first. I agree about using as few names as possible, to keep it simple and clear, but I didn't want to ignore any important kind. Which one do you think is in excess in the chart?? Alessio Damato 04:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Many of those charts in the other articles are written by home-brewers who think technical information is important for everyone. I agree with you completely that the idea should be to let anyone get more information about the type of beer they are drinking even if they know nothing about home-brewing. Unfortunately, beer labels are not the same in all countries. Germany, for example, usually lists the beer type in addition to the name. Belgium and the Netherlands, however, list the type much less. In Europe, I believe all bottles list abv, although I am not sure about the US. It is possible to get a list of the major beer types from brewers groups in Belgium and Germany and from CAMRA in the UK. I am not sure if that is too much or not. Perhaps take a look and see what you think. BTW, I see that you are Italian. Do you know this site?: http://www.kuaska.it/nuovo/default.asp?a=storia&lan=ita Mikebe 13:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

thanks for the links but... do you speak all languages?! I didn't know the Italian link either, it's really interesting. I don't think this chart goes too technical. Since it puts similar beers in the same "section", if a drinker has a reminder of a beer he had in the past, he can guess how another similar beer is going to taste like. And since the chart is quite small (compared to the huge complexity of brewing), it can give a quick overview. I know, Belgian beers usually don't show the beer type as big as Germans do, but it is often written smaller somewhere on the label, and the user can look for it until he finds any of the names of the chart.

In the links you gave me, beer types are listed in detail, we should try to understand which ones are kinds of beer, which other ones are sub-sub-sub-kinds... If a particular kind is very rare, then it is to be classified as "special" or "hybrid", and there is no room for it in such a general chart.

In the CAMRA website I found Old ale and Golden ale that could be worth being inserted in the chart. The Italian site you sent me is very detailed about beer styles, I will take a look carefully when I have more time. The best way to improve this chart would be to show this chart on the German and French wikipedia, so that more people can express their opinion about it. Who's going to do that? Alessio Damato 11:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I have uploaded the description of the image on Commons according to this discussion, moreover I made some changes from the original version that started this discussion. So, if you want to make other comments, please start a new thread. Alessio Damato 13:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I guess my biggest problem with the chart is that the whole "dark ale" catagory is just different types of PORTERS KenBest 16:50, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Quick references

Style guidelines:

• Brewers Association style guidelines 2006
• BJCP style guidelines 2004
• CBA beer style guidelines
• NGWBJ beer styles
• CAMRA outline (without numbers)
• Deutsche Brauer Bund guidelines (in German)

Not readily found: SIBA and CAMRA guidelines. (I have CAMRA guidelines on paper at home, but I don't know if I'm allowed to put them somewhere public.) User:Mikebe suggested that there should also be guidelines for Belgian beer styles somewhere on the Zythos page, but I don't speak any Flemish at all. --Stlemur 09:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• As your links clearly demonstrate, "beer style guidelines" is an expression used by brewers, not by beer drinkers. And so, is of more interest to brewers than drinkers. However, having said that, my goal was not to start a debate, simply to state what I consider a valid point. There is an association for Belgian brewers and they have a style list on their site (in English). I think their list also demonstrates the difference between how "style guides" are greatly different between European brewing nations and the US. Here it is: http://www.beerparadise.be/emc.asp?pageId=727 For comparison, here is another list (from the Zythos site) made by someone who is proposing a new beer festival. He says that his group is trying to present as many different Belgian beer styles as possible and offers the list of styles they hope to present: http://www.zythos.be/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5149#5149 Mikebe 14:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Style guidelines are not just for brewers, but are for anyone with a reason or a desire to judge beers or to categorize them. A big thank you to those who have located other sources of style guidelines. I personally am most familiar with BJCP, but I think drawing from all these different style guidelines can only be a good thing.

I assume you are a home-brewer because I have only heard this from other home-brewers. In the milieu where I drink beer, nobody says "what style was that?" they say instead "did you like that beer". That is how beer drinkers talk with each other. What you suggest is how brewers talk with each other. Let's at least be clear about that. Mikebe 20:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Clearly we drink in different milieus. --Stlemur 21:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm curious. I drink in pubs (or cafés, as they are called in Belgium and the Netherlands). In what milieu is it that you drink? Mikebe 11:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

One reverted edit raised the question of how many beer styles there are. I think that's like asking how many styles of music there are. Is stout a style? Well, yes, but it can be subdivided into sweet stout, dry stout, milk stout, oatmeal stout, Russian Imperial stout, and probably others. Are those all styles too, then?

Until recently there was a subsection of Elements of Style that listed vital statistics; it has been gutted and renamed, and is now largely redundant with other subsections; in my opinion should be restored to something closer to what it was. What do others think? --Mwalimu59 19:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Strength!

The strength of the beer can refer to three variables: original gravity, final gravity, and alcohol concentration.

Isn't it one variable --- the beer's alcohol concentration, which is determined by the difference between the final gravity and the original gravity? The final gravity can determine the mouthfeel, but that's not referred to as 'strength'. — goethean ॐ 17:46, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The brewer can control originl gravity, and he can control attenuation. I count that as two independent variables; final gravity is a dependent variable of those two and any two uniquely determine the third.

I'm not crazy about how final gravity is presented there but I'm hoping I can make that into a segue into yeast and attenuation. The whole "Elements of beer style" section needs a complete reimagining but I can't do it all at once so I'm improving bits as I have the time and energy. A lot of the material shouldn't even be here.

My basic vision for the structure is parallel discussions of different approaches to beer style; style as a legal classification, style in the beer festival/competition context, and then the zen "there are no styles" argument. --Stlemur 19:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I personally think of beer styles as a product of the history of brewing. English brewing techniques and ingredients -> English beers, etc. — goethean ॐ 20:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The legal end of things is important, too. Roasted barley in stouts was encouraged by a different duty being charged on malted gran and unmalted grain, there were German legal restrictions against brewing lagers within city boundaries that encouraged the establishment of altbier, early intellectual property rules stifled gruit... --Stlemur 21:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

External links

Since there seems to be some dispute over which links should remain in the External Links section of the article. After a quick reread of WP:EL I would like to offer the following opinions on the links in question.

• The history of British beer styles
• The history of lager styles
• Campaign For Real Ale (CAMRA)

The above three are the ones still present in the current edit of the article. Unlike a couple of the pages below, none of the above pages attempts to cover all beer styles. The first two give pretty detailed coverage of a subset of beer styles and as such would be good to keep; the third (the CAMRA page) isn't that closely about beer styles per se and if paring down the list is needed it would be one of the leading candidates for removal (though it would be a good link from one or more of the specific style articles). If you're going to keep it, at least link to the styles subpage instead.

• BeerAdvocate Beer Styles
• BJCP
• Brewers Association
• Michael Jackson's Beer Styles Index

All of these at least attempt to cover all beer styles. Of these, the Brewers Association page is the most homebrew oriented and if that's grounds for removal would be the first to go. The BJCP page should probably be changed to link the style subpage but is still one of the best resources I've seen on beer styles. It is somewhat homebrew oriented but I don't think that's enough of a detriment to outweigh the quality of the information. Both the Beer Advocate and the Michael Jackson page are oriented toward beer drinkers, not homebrewers, and both include a number of beer styles not covered by any of the pages from the first group.

If the objective for links in the article to give the reader the best resources for additional information then IMO the CAMRA and the Brewers Association links could go; the rest should stay. --Mwalimu59 20:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

There is a debate over on the beer project talk page that gives the backstory on the deletions. I say keep the last 3 of the 4 in question (with corrections as noted) because they contained detailed explanation of various styles. Thetrick 15:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Seeing that objections have been raised about BeerAdvocate, that one can be left out as well. As for the others, if anyone objects to restoring the BJCP and Michael Jackson links, I would ask that you please suggest suitable alternate links to add that provide something approaching full coverage of the range of beer styles, which as noted previously is not provided by any of the links currently still in the article. --Mwalimu59 16:29, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I have no problem with the Michael Jackson link, but the BJCP is full of crap. Their style guide for European beers are mostly nonsense. Bear in mind this is not a home-brewing article (those already exist). Also we don't need to have a million links. The ones there, plus the Michael Jackson seem reasonable enough to me and I don't see any need for the others. Mikebe 19:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with your statement that the BJCP page is "full of crap" - I've met some of the people who crafted the style guidelines and they have a good deal of respect for the history and the origins of the styles, including the European ones. But with the Michael Jackson page included I won't belabor the discussion further. I've gone ahead and made the edits to the page per the discussion here. I hope everyone's reasonably happy with the results. --Mwalimu59 19:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough on the links. Regarding the BJCP, I will be more than happy to prove my claim based not on people's "respect", but based on fact. Mikebe 20:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

After reviewing the edit history of several beer-related articles and your user talk page, I've decided there are better uses for my time than engaging you in a discussion of the merits of the BJCP. --Mwalimu59 20:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Great! That works for me. Mikebe 20:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

During the above discussion I was not aware that the two europeanbeerguide pages are maintained by a frequent contributor to these pages, which makes their inclusion here questionable under WP:EL. --Mwalimu59 13:29, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean this section: "You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked. If the link is to a relevant and informative site that should otherwise be included, please consider mentioning it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it."? After his treatment here yesterday (see Goethean's comments), he has decided to stop contributing (he's a friend of mine IRL) at least for now. His pages contain much detailed information and are very well documented (feel free to check for yourself), so I think they would stand up well under review. If you want to do a RFC anyhow, I won't object, although, as I said, I think it's unnecessary. Mikebe 13:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

How many times have you two dramatically promised quit Wikipedia now? I think we're on our third or fourth attempt. — goethean ॐ 14:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for the confession. It will come in handy. Mikebe 14:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Malt Liquor

Why is Malt Liquor not included in the list of beer styles, even though wikipedia has an article on it describing it as a style of beer? 142.157.194.73 (talk) 21:29, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, though malt liquor is a beer, it doesn't fall into a traditional style. On the rare occasions that it's presented at beer competitions is is entered in the "specialty beer" category, a catch-all category for any beer that doesn't fit into an existing style category. I'm hoping to find time to rewrite this article shortly, and I'll be sure to include this information when I do. – ClockworkSoul 20:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Careful when applying US beer competition rules to the whole world. Globally there's lots of unhopped beer out there. --Stlemur (talk) 20:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Generally speaking, malt liquor is an existing style category. Talk to any convenience store or package store owner, and you will be shown an entire array of similarly-made, similar-tasting alcoholic beverages called "malt liquor." That this has been true for many decades surely attests to the style's status as traditional. Dunkelweizen (talk) 14:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

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) 04:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

External links

Hello all. There has been a conflict brewing – if you'll forgive the shameless pun – regarding the inclusion of the BJCP competitive style guidelines as an external link. I can see in the discussion above that it was deemed by a couple of editors to be inadequate as a source, but I'm still not clear as to why it's inadequate even as an external link. Certainly, creative brewers color outside the lines, but it seems a reasonably interesting "additional reading" resource as long as it can be clarified in our own text that styles in practice are far "fuzzier" than they are presented there. For that reason, I would like to see it included as an external link, but not considered a reliable source for the purposes of citation. – ClockworkSoul 19:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

So long as it's clear that it's not a source, I guess it doesn't do much harm being there...one thing which worries me, though, is this edit summary. There was a lot of discivility last time there was major discussion in this article, and I'd rather avoid a repeat. --Stlemur (talk) 20:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Deliberately citing irrelevant policy crazy allegations edit warring more. Civil? — goethean ॐ 20:33, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not pointing fingers. Even if someone else is discivil, it only hurts the article if someone else responds in kind. --Stlemur (talk) 20:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC)