Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink/Beverages Task Force/Archive/Mixed Drinks 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

This archive covers discussions from the Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Mixed Drinks page for 2007

This message is to notify you that numerous stub templates and categories that are associated with this WikiProject ({{

For everyone's information, these are templates and categories that I created early on to help get a grip on the cocktails articles for the

The Beatles WikiProject's version, but I could really use some help--especially from anyone with experience in esoteric template design and parser functions. The templates and categories above will almost certainly be deleted, and that is fine. --Willscrlt

02:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Rename this WikiProject from WikiProject Cocktails to WikiProject Mixed Drinks to more closely match the scope of the WikiProject and update all relevant pages, templates, categories, links, etc. Proposed by Willscrlt 07:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC).

Outcome

Voting was ended early due to input from all but two currently active Participants, with 100% unanimous approval of the proposal. The name was changed on January 17, 2007.

A clarification of the Project's scope included within the proposal is worth noting:

There is an ongoing consensus proposal to standardise the format of measurements across Wikiproject Cocktails. In essence, the discussion is between the use of absolute units (

Where did this name come from? Sounds like something only a committee would dream up :) What is "related drinkware"? Stevage 02:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I confess! I made it up, not a committee. Maybe I just have multiple personalities? :-) Seriously, though, it is because there are a lot of drinkware (a term I did not make up) that owes its existence to various cocktails (the cocktail glass is probably the most notable and directly related of the bunch). On the other hand, I didn't want to get carried away and pick up every stray piece of drinkware out there (do we really want to be responsible for drinking horns and several varieties of beer steins?). The wording might have been better -- but I couldn't think of anything else. And nobody offered any other suggestions (or complaints) during the voting, so I guess it wasn't too offensive. :-) I am creating a related WikiProject over at WikiBooks, and it is the Bartending WikiProject. The main reason for that name is that the related section there is called the Wikibooks Bartending Guide, so it seemed to work. It's at least a lot shorter. --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 15:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Your goal is admirable :) Could I suggest you just make the title "WikiProject Mixed Drinks" (which it seems to be in many places?) then just clarify in its description that you cover "related drinkware". With every WP you have to draw a line somewhere about what's in and what's out - it's perfectly reasonable to say that martini glasses are *in* but beer glasses are *out*. 202.10.88.139 00:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I have created a new task force (subdivision/department/whatever) called the Bartending task force. It actually ties in very nicely with the WikiBooks Bartending WikiProject that I just created over there. My idea with the task force is to move the drinkware into that task force, as well as bartending tools and bartender biographies. Then the Mixed Drinks WikiProject can remain dedicated to the drinks themselves, and leave the tools of the trade, the trade itself, and the practitioners of the trade to the smaller group interested in those topics. For those interested, I have created the following userboxes:

This user is a Bartending Task Force Participant.

This user is a WikiBooks participant in the WikiProject Bartending.

If you are interested in joining the task force, it's as simple as adding your name to the Participants List and indicating that you are interested in the Bartending task force. For the WikiProject over at WikiBooks, use the separate Participants List there.

For those not familiar with WikiBooks, they have created a very useful Bartending Guide. If it looks a little chaotic and like there is a lot of clutter in it, don't blame the Wikibookians. Most of the cruft there came from Wikipedians, who sometimes view WikiBooks as their personal Wikipedia dumping ground for substandard article content. One of my main goals for the collaboration between the projects is to avoid that kind of thinking and work together to improve the encyclopedia of drinks here and the bartending guide there at the same time.

The Bartending task force would, in addition to focusing on bartending articles here, work on the trans-wiki collaboration between both projects.

And, since drinkware would be covered by the task force, I see no problem dropping it out of the formal name of the main WikiProject. :-) Thoughts? --Willscrlt (Talk·Cntrb) 05:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Background: Over at Guinness there have been a lot of additions of mixed drinks with Guinness and I've been removing or asking for citations for all but the "most notable" (i.e., ones I've heard of -- black & tan, Irish car bomb, Black Velvet).

How do I go about determining whether a particular mixed drink with Guinness is notable? Is Webtender a reliable source? It strikes me as impractical and unencyclopedic to have every name for a particular drink (maybe transwiki to Wikibooks Cookbook?) and I'm not a mixed-drink bartender -- all my experience is with beer-only bars -- so I don't necessarily know all the standard recipes. --

I read the galliano page and it states at the bottom that galliano is often "served on optic" at some tennis event . . . what does "served on optic" mean?

Ryan

I believe this is probibly refering to the drink being "served as an optic" - that is, being dispensed from bottles on the wall behind a bar. That is the closest phrase that I can think of to "served on optic". Having never heard the phrase "served on optic" before, I cannot offer a firm answer to the question. If indeed the article does mean "served as an optic", (which in context it seems to)this ought to be changed: I will not make the change yet, instead I will wait for any feedback on the matter. --Niall9 17:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

the Mixed Drinks article that brought the WikiProject to my attention last week has, after I spend some time working on it, been added to 'Do You Know...' for today. I don't know if the Project has a place where we collect things like good articles, dyk, etc. Anywhere? --Thespian 16:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I came across this article through random articles. It is unsourced and comes up with few hits on Google and no reliable sources. [1]. I am thinking of proposing it for deletion or at AfD but wanted some feedback from the relevant Wikiproject before I did so. Capitalistroadster 21:34, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is slowly being taken over by vested interests.

Someone connected to the IBA is constantly removing any comments that disagree with the "official" receipe for the Gibson cocktail. Their ratio of 6:1 gin to vermouth for a Gibson is simply strange and does not accord with well known sources. Just wait and see - the edit will again be removed.

The wiki directors need to be wary of this hijacking by vested interests.

There is an article under

I've deleted the line from the Galliano page saying that it had made a recent comeback, being "served on optic at the Royal Camber Lawn Hockey Club." Someone trying to be funny. There is a Royal Camber Lawn Tennis Club, and there is a game called Field (not Lawn) Hockey, but there is no RCLHC, and as noted above "served on optic" doesn't seem to mean anything -- and it wouldn't signal much of a comeback if Galleano was selling well at the actually existing RCLTC.CuConnacht 20:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Please take a look at the new article Lucas Bols, the liqueur producer. The also own the Galliano trademark. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Consuelo D'Guiche (talk • contribs) 18:46, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Another editor has nominated

The result was Delete. I have just updated the template. MurphiaMan 15:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I may have bumped into a few of you on here and as such you may know I work extensively on WikiProject Food and Drink which is the parent project to this one. As such, I have in an attempt to revive some of the other projects which have softened by revamping their main pages and adding subsidiary pages for better organization and appeal. Now this project has a large following and doesn't necessarily at this point need appeal for new members, but it can never hurt. It will also give the page an ease of use for places to click and get templates along with info on merge proposals, deletion proposals, and other information on the project.

As this project is very active I wanted to talk here first about helping the project by putting it along the format which WikiProject Food and Drink, Wikiproject Wine, WikiProject Foodservice and WikiProject Cheeses are currently under. I'm still finalizing Foodservice and I am offering the same to the remaining projects under Food and Drink as well. Please take a look at the other pages and tell me what you think when you get a chance.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 03:10, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

As there was no opposition I reformatted the main page to model the changes made to most of the other projects associated with

WikiProject Food and Drink. Let me know if there is anything you would like me to change on it. I was going to offer to set up assessment capabilities for your project banner as well if members desire to undertake the task of going through and assessing the articles associated with this project.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC

00:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Your talkpage template says: "If you feel this page is substandard and are considering deletion—please don't. For GFDL license compliance, we need to keep the edit history intact in case there is any information worth merging elsewhere." This seems somewhat odd, why are pages under this project so special that they should not be nominated for deletion "just in case they have to be merged?" If an article is nominated for deletion and it is to be merged, not deleted, it won't be deleted. This seems to be a very poor reason to prevent deletion. Mr.Z-man 02:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello. As the person who designed the template, I will be happy to share the reason with you behind that statement.

First, this is not a situation unique to this WikiProject. Any article that is combined into another article is supposed to redirect to the combined article and the original history is to be maintained for GFDL compliance. There is nothing different about this policy for our WikiProject.

The thing that is a little different about the Mixed Drinks articles is that we have a few established places into which we can move very short articles. The one that comes to mind first is List of cocktails and the related lists. Ideally what should happen is the small article be moved into the appropriate list, the article be converted to a redirect to the appropriate section within the list with the {{R to list entry}} template added. Then, later if someone comes up with enough additional information to flesh out a full article, the page can have the redirect removed and it can be turned back into an article with full edit history intact.

I hope that helps you understand the reasoning in general and specific to the articles our WikiProject oversees. --Willscrlt (Talk) 04:21, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I know about needing to keep the history if an article is merged, but the template seems to suggest articles should not be deleted in case they are merged. Mr.Z-man 04:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

There is an historical reason to that exact wording, and it should probably be updated unless other members of this WikiProject plan to actively work on those articles. There are actually two templates that are related (see Talk:Freddie Bartholomew (cocktail) to see both of them -- not that it should HAVE both of those templates, but for the moment, it does).

From December 2006-February 2007 the Project was working on a Wiki-wide identifying and classification emphasis. We were trying to locate all the articles related to our Project. Unfortunately, once we identified an article, it seemed to draw a lot more attention to it, and they got nominated for deletion before anything could be done other than to identify it. It was a catch-22. We added the wording as an appeal to give the Project members time to complete their work by the stated deadline. It did help a lot. Unfortunately, not a whole lot has been done since then to go through and merge the information into a list, so there are a lot of tagged articles out there that probably shouldn't still be around. Maybe the plea worked a little too well. :-P

I do not have the necessary time to make the changes (which is also why I haven't been around Wikipedia in several months). Hopefully someone else in the Project will adopt this task. Otherwise, the template should be updated to be a little more clear and accurate. I will post an announcement on the Project home page. Thanks Mr. Z-man for bringing this up. --Willscrlt (Talk) 06:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I have updated the wording on both templates. {{WPMIXMergeDelete}} is now identified as deprecated (and I fixed some other glitches). WPMIX has been updated to soften the request and adds a 30-day time-frame request for someone to fix the problems and then encourages deletion as normal. This doesn't imply that the Project has any special rights, but it does give people a potentially helpful alternative to outright deletion. Now it's up to Project members to remember to check Category:WikiProject Mixed Drinks merge-delete candidates a few times a month and deal with the problems that come up. Otherwise, the template will become a joke and will not be taken seriously. --Willscrlt (Talk) 06:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)