User talk:Agne27/Archive 8 - Wikipedia

Supplying the names of wineries does not serve as a "wine-guide." It informs the literal topic of the wine route.Heysuk (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 18:53, 22 December 2008 (UTC).Reply

An external link to an "official website" listing the wineries would suffice. Wikipedia an encyclopedia, not a tourist guide. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 19:13, 22 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'll bite. This listing of wines seems to me is comparable to the listing of Beatrice Foods brands or List of Coca-Cola brands. Are those two pages in need of revision too? I think you're being over broad in applying a policy that's meant to keep out wine reviews --- this seems more a listing of brands under one umbrella, comparable to the Beatrice and Coca-Cola examples. Rickterp (talk) 12:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Further, I see that E & J Gallo Winery has a listing of brands. Two wrongs don't make a right, but your Bronco Wine Company edit doesn't make sense to me and there seems ample precedence for keeping this listing. Rickterp (talk) 13:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Good to finally see this article, since it was the last (major) regional article missing for France. I just added the wikilinks, and noticed that the German article de:Weinbau auf Korsika is actually "GA" (Lesenswert), a lot more extensive than the French one, and also illustrated with several images. Perhaps you're interested in adding a couple of them to the enwiki article. Tomas e (talk) 07:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Wow...that is a nice article. Thanks for the link. I'll try to finish off the article later today. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 16:11, 23 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Agne - I was in the process of moving Flickr-sourced images to the Commons so that their licenses can be verified and the images made available to other projects (you may have noticed that I moved some of your other nice vineyard and wine images - good finds!) Anyway, I ran across the above image - it's currently orphaned and has some contradictory licensing info, and it appears the original source has gone dead. Can we delete the image? Kelly ^hi! 15:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sure. Looks like it is not needed anymore. I appreciate your work moving those images. Thanks! Agne^Cheese/^Wine 15:58, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Agne - I nominated the image for deletion. For your future uploads from Flickr, I'd like to recommend Flickr Upload Bot (you'll need to have a Commons account). It automatically fills out the details for you and verifies the license, so you never have to worry about the copyright status being questioned if the photographer goes offline or changes the copyright details on the photo sometime in the future. Kelly ^hi! 17:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

--BorgQueen (talk) 16:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

  Thanks for uploading Image:Trentino Cab.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

  Thanks for uploading Image:Brotherhood winery label.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Stag's leap bottle.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Million_Moments (talk) 19:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Delivered by the automated Giggabot (stop!) 01:08, 9 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Haven't seen you hanging around there much lately. I kind of miss seeing your quality wine articles there. Have you given up on DYK, or do you just no longer have the time? Gatoclass (talk) 08:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

You just happened to catch me online. :) I've actually been taking a little wiki-break due to a hectic work schedule and studying for my Certified Wine Educator exam. Things are starting settle so I hope to bump up my activity. I'm nearing completion of a new History of French wine article that I will be hopefully submitting to DYK by the weekend. Thanks for the thoughts! :) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 08:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Oh, good! I look forward to reading your new article :) Gatoclass (talk) 03:43, 17 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Welcome back, and great article on History of French wine! Perhaps I'll add a couple of sentences on Alsace; I may have some text pieces handy. I notice that you base it primarily on OCW. In the unlikely event that you don't own it already, I can really recommend The Story of Wine. I also noted that another of your contributions, a certain image, just made a guest apperance in the Syrah article.
A completely different thing. I'm going to Mosel for a couple of days in about one week's time. The Mosel wine article seems rather well illustrated, but do you still think there are any images missing in it? And obviously, I won't be able to take pictures of an Eiswein harvest or the sorting-out of TBA grapes... :-) Tomas e (talk) 15:17, 17 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the note. Yeah, I do have Johnson's Vintage and have taken a few notes for the article that I just haven't incoporated in. I did rely heavily on the OCW because it condenses things nicely and is the most up to date (2006) book resource in my collection. I know a few things in Vintage have been disproved in the last 2 decades.
Oooh the Mosel trip sounds fun. As for pictures, I'd really like to see more "glass of wine w/ bottle" pictures overall--with the Mosel and German wine both needing one. A nice "dream pic" would be a line up of the different classifications from Qba to Kabinett to Trockenbeerenauslese (ideally from the same producer) that shows the different color concentration of the wine. Other pic ideas include include some of the unillustrated grape varieties like Elbling, Trollinger and Auxerrois Blanc (though their plantings are pretty scarce in the Mosel). Some of the more famous vineyards like the Mittelmosel's sundial vineyards; Brauneberg Juffer-Sonnenuhr, Wehlener Sonnenuhr, Zeltinger Sonnenuhr probably are notable enough to merit their own splinter article from Mosel wine and it would be nice to have some pictures of those. The same with the Juffermauer vineyard near Treis-Karden. There are also articles that need to be created (or expanded) on well known Mosel wine estates like those of Ernst Loosen, J.J. Prüm, S.A. Prüm, Fritz Haag, Selbach-Oster, Schloss Saarstein, St.-Urbans-Hof, etc. While those articles might not be written soon, it would be nice to have some Commons photos for those when we do get around to those articles. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 23:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

--BorgQueen (talk) 17:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

And BTW, thanks for pitching in with the reviews at the DYK suggestions page. When I asked why I hadn't seen you around at DYK for a while, I was thinking of your articles, I'd completely forgotten you reviewed other folks hooks as well! Anyhow - you do a great job as a reviewer, so I hope you can find the time to keep contributing there :) Gatoclass (talk) 10:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

--Gatoclass (talk) 13:54, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Looks like you accidentally blanked the suggestions page: [1]. Your summary sounded like you meant to approve a hook so maybe you want to go give it a   - I'd check it myself but I'm about to run. Cheers, Olaf Davis | Talk 23:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Huh....how in the hell did I do that? After I clicked save, my browser took me back to the page and everything looked normal with my comment included. Weird. Thanks though. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 23:09, 27 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

I see you're active in reviewing DYK noms... I'd like your help. I expanded the BEL Weapon Locating Radar page on 25th July and nom'ed it for DYK on that day.... but I haven't got a comment till now. I think there may be something wrong in the nom or the hook, since both the entries next to this one have been reviewed. Could you take a looksie and tell me what I'm doing wrong? Coz the main text of the article has definitely been expanded at least 10X. All the 3 hooks I've suggested have been cited with what i think are pretty reliable sources. And I dont think the hooks have exceeded length.

Thanks a ton. Sniperz11_@^CS 00:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

The fact that it hasn't been commented on yet shouldn't be a cause for alarm. Most hooks don't get seriously vetted till they are closer to expiring. Newer hooks may get an earlier review if something jumps out to the reviewer (like it peaks their interest or there is a glaring problem). One of the things that I personally do is give each hook a quick glance through for date/length issues or other obvious problems and then come back to them later on to review the referencing. That way if there is something that will likely need a significant amount of work from the nominator they will know earlier. When I did a quick glance through on BEL WLR, I didn't notice any obvious issues so it basically passed that first, cursory review. I'm sure it will get it a secondary review on the referencing within the next day or two. It can be time consuming reviewing hooks so most reviewer will review a few and then take a break before going back to reviewing. You are always welcome to help out with the load by reviewing other hooks on the suggestion page. That will lessen the load and give other reviewers more opportunities to review your nom. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 01:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a ton for that... its a relief. Btw, even I can review hooks??? I was under the impression that only a few ppl can do it, at least the vetting part. If I need to help out, is there a list I should add my name to??? Thanks a ton. Cheers. Sniperz11_@^CS 17:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

There's not really any list. You just read up on the rules listed at the top of the page and start reviewing. Some of the regulars may notice a new name reviewing and double check a few but that's about it. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 02:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your DYK review of my article. It will be hard for me to expand it even more because of lack of further sources and information :( I am glad you found the article interesting, anyway. :) --Kasjanek21 (talk) 08:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your notice. Ottava Rima (talk) 13:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Quick question - I know Richardson would be close, but it was hard to determine. Based on the total k, it should be 5x the none removed first size. However, that includes a few images and two sections of text that I converted into a "quote" box, which would technically be images. I can add more if needed. What do you think? Ottava Rima (talk) 05:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

It never hurts to add more. I think the hook is a good one and so I don't think it's at risk but anytime you can further improve an article is a good thing to do. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 05:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

I hope you understand where I am coming from about the recent DYK talk page change. My feelings are that the page and the original person get credit, so there isn't major foul. I can understand the arguments from both sides, but I think it should be a credit to Ryan that he was willing to not fight anyone who wished to change it back on their own. Does this make sense? You can contact me about it if you would like to talk. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

It's fine. I was glad the article got credit. I was mostly concerned with the misplaced "BLP-paranoia" that caused Wikipedia to send a an offensive and hurtful message under the banner of "BLP". There's a systematic problem at root here that in the long run doesn't protect BLPs and only ends up producing more drama. Unfortunately, it looks like little will change and the kindling will stay smoldering till the next drama explosion. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps a Village Pump misc or policy discussion on the issue without naming individuals but focusing on the discussion in general? There are some talented people at the Medicine WP that deal with such things quite often and they could be notified about the discussion to help. How does this sound? Ottava Rima (talk) 19:07, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Admittedly I'm a bit tired and worn out from the ordeal so I would like to take a step back from the issue. I'm sure there will be another opportunity to bring it up. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 20:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I updated the article on Boom in the Moon for the 29 July DYK consideration, as you requested. Please re-review to confirm the article makes the grade. Cheers! Ecoleetage (talk) 14:31, 29 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

--Gatoclass (talk) 10:02, 1 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

--Gatoclass (talk) 07:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your comments about the image. - DaughterofSun (talk) 16:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi Agne.

I saw the hubbub over the DYK hook and wince over the way it was handled. I think you were 100% right here.

Moreover, I'm glad to see you're still editing regularly. One of my pipe dreams (the one entitled "Productive Content Contributor") is to put all of my considerable weight behind WP:WINE and go around Flickr and real-life vineyards looking for beautiful pictures and to get out all my wine books and start copyediting and expanding articles about varietals and wine regions.

That's probably never going to happen (as I'm far too easily distracted by the latest wikiscandal and wikidrama when I'm not busy and/or lazy in RL), but even if I never grow into a worthwhile editor, I will continue to marvel at the content you produce. warmest regards, The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 21:09, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Heh, thanks for the note. It's okay (both the DYK hook thing and being a lazy editor :p). We still need level headed and grounded editors involved in our day to day wikidramas and scandals to sort things out. Else wise the crazies would truly be running the asylum. Speaking of crazies, have they made you an admin yet? ;) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

No, I've been a very naughty Fat Man lately... publicly insulting the Arbitration committee, biting newbies, hanging out at attack sites. I would be thoroughly rotisseried at RfA. But when I start canvassing for support of my promotion, yours will the first talk page I visit. :-)--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 21:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

LOL....silly Fat Man. Don't you know that you're not suppose to be doing that stuff till after you got the mop? :p Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Rats. I should have thought of that earlier. At least I still have a stealth sockpuppet account, where I can quietly accumulate innocuous edits only to run amok with impunity after my RfA.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 23:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Could you please reconsider. I basically trippled the length of the article just today. I have also spent a considerable amount of time trying to help relieve the backload.Nrswanson (talk) 09:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

We certainly appreciate the help but we should be fair and apply the standards equally to everyone. If we bend the rules for you, me, or any of the other DYK regulars, then it is hard to be consistent and fair with everyone else. On the WT:DYK thread I linked to, a senior admin and frequent DYK contributor expressed his desire for an expanded 7 day rule. I would recommend reviving that discussion and maybe you can lead consensus your way to make that change. You are also welcomed to note the recent 3x expansion on the nominating page. That does add a unique element and I certainly wouldn't object to an admin WP:IARing it in based on that. I hope you don't take my review as a personal slight. I only wish to be fair and consistent with everyone. At least an WP:IAR hook would be clearly identified as on that is being WP:IAR-ed in. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 09:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

How would I go about getting an administrator to do that?Nrswanson (talk) 11:51, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

You simply state your case on the suggestion page and leave it up to an administrator to decide what to do. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 16:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Please note this. I listed Irene for August 14, but saw The Vanity of Human Wishes dangling at the end, and decided to combine the two based on them being produced the same year and while Johnson was busy on a famous work on his (the Dictionary). There seemed to be a back log of DYK, so I thought combining two might ease the problem some. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi Agne,

You made a request some time ago, for the creation of an illustration of a wine grape, as part of m:PGIP. That request has now been fulfilled (Image:Wine_grape_diagram_en.svg) but the illustrator would appreciate any feedback you have on its accuracy, especially concerning locules! Please leave any comments you have at https://jira.toolserver.org/browse/PGIP-33 . thanks, pfctdayelise (talk) 12:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thanks for being bold with editing this article. However, can you please alert the rest of us on the nature of you major edits? This article is a mess, and was almost deleted. Some of the material you deleted could be further down in a sub-section, minus the POV. Thanks again. Bearian (talk) 17:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Oh I'm going to do a complete, fully referenced rewrite and publish it by the beginning of next week. Very little of the current material will be used. The purpose of the clean up was two fold--one, I felt compelled to get rid of some of the more glaring messes and inaccuracies because it's better to have stub than a bad article and two, I'm going to use this rewrite to facilitate discussion over at DYK about new content and rewrite. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 03:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Unfortunately work stuff got in the way today so I wasn't able to complete the article. I should be able to devote a nice chunk of time to it Wednesday. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 04:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

Looking forward to your new version. I recall detesting that article when I tried to clean up the more egregious NPOV violations in August. I ended up tagging a bunch of things and giving up. A wholesale replacement with new content would be welcome from my point of view. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yeah...I got sidetracked. I have my Certified Wine Educator exam coming up next week so my wiki-editing is concentrating on prep work for that exam. I have my notes done, it just getting to the grunt work of writing the article. If you or Bearian feel its better to revert back to a previous version, I'll cringe but won't be begrudge it. :p But I'll have a new article up shortly after my exam. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 02:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

The current version is sparse, but any previous version is just more garbage, so there isn't any point to reverting back. I'm going to leave it alone and wait to see your version. I congratulate you on even attempting to re-write an article about such a subjective subject. I mean, there isn't a lot of objectivity out there on wine and food matching, unlike for articles about grape varietals. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:05, 3 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Took a month, but I finally got around to it. Feel free to improve. :) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 07:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Please refer to WP:CITESHORT for the shortening of footnotes/references. Cheers. -- Iterator12n ^Talk 05:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Again, it's not required. There is only a recommendation. I still contend it will be confusing and will just have to be undone once new refs are added. I appreciate your interest in improving the article but I fret that these improvements will only add more confusion and headaches in the long run. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Nothing is "required." As is, it only looks amateuristic. -- Iterator12n ^Talk 23:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

That's fine. Again, I appreciate your concern but when I eventually get around to expanding it with other references, I would appreciate more not having to redo the referencing to avoid confusion with other references. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 00:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

On 07 October, you created two redirects: Débourbage & Debourbage. Debourbage redirects to Débourbage and Débourbage redirects to itself. Can you fix this, please? Débourbage should point to a valid target and Debourbage should point to the same target so that it's not a double redirect. I searched for possible targets, but didn't find anything definitive so wasn't positive what you had in mind or else I would have fixed it. Thanks! -- JLaTondre (talk) 17:14, 9 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Oh lordy...that's what I get for editing late at night. Complete brain shut down. I meant to redirect it to Settling but somehow screwed that up royally. Thanks for pointing it out. I fixed it. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 20:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I saw that you added information on "Fuhroter Veltliner" in the Grüner Veltliner article, and a redirect of this name. Could you doublecheck your source for the spelling? Because I suspect it should be spelled de:Frühroter Veltliner "early red Veltliner". Tomas e (talk) 21:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, my source doesn't have the ü but then again Gruner Veltliner is also spelt without the ü as well. I would trust your knowledge of the German language and wouldn't object to the spelling change. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 21:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello Agne, I note your removal of my additions to the Spinning Cone page. I have added some points to the discussion page (perhaps incorrectly - I am in wiki learning mode) but not sure how to best elicit comments. The point I would like to make is that there have been several low- and reduced-alcohol wines released recently in Spain despite use of the technology being 'illegal' in the EU. These are referenced in trade journals and other literature and while perhaps of a 'marketing' nature for the winery involved, I feel the presence of such wines in the marketplace adds to the body of information on use of spinning cone technology, particularly under "wine Controversry" section. I would welcome advice as to how such information may be appropriately inserted into this wiki page. (My feeling is that if a single winery is not predominant or favoured in the article the issue of inadvertent advertising is diminished)!! I'd be very grateful for your suggesstions and comments. Thanks Ado073 (talk) 19:40, 17 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

On the talk page of the Spinning cone page, Amatulic and I have responded to some of your concerns. I think there is a middle ground that we can find to include some of the information but the key will be to have sources that comply with our reliable sources guideline. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 03:30, 18 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your comments. I will review, revise and seek your input again at that time. Cheers. Ado073 (talk) 10:16, 18 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Molina_World_Series_Banner.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 02:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading Image:Wine label.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 07:03, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

This newsletter was sent by §hepBot (Disable) at 20:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC) by the request of Moni3 (talk)Reply

Your wine maps are wonderful! A real asset to Wikipedia. AgneCheese/Wine 20:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you ! ;)

I'm sorry but my english is very bad. The maps are in french and you can't modify them because they are in png format. The svg format deforms maps regrettably. So if you want the maps in english, send me the translations of the texts of maps. I hope you understand what I write :s lol --Lofo7 (talk) 23:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 00:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Alright, I like you, so I'll drop it. 68.4.53.3 (talk) 04:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I know, and I'll give it a go. The reason I usually edit directly is, that when I edit in sandbox, I sometimes get distracted, often for days or weeks and suddenly my edits aren't valid any more, as someone has edited the article. Then I have to redo it all over again. All by my own fault of course. Another reason is that I've had techincal difficulties with the sandbox. But I'll try and adhere.Nwinther (talk) 09:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

OK, it was a couple of weeks ago since you last added all those grape articles, but they were very many put together, so I think you have definitely deserved this barnstar! (We probably use them too little.)
By the way, the existence of one of your other recent articles, List of Vins de Primeur, seems to have created some Gallic surprise. I have the impression that some editors of other language versions, who themselves are not really active at enwiki, actively monitor the WPWine page and the project's articles. A very comprehensive article de:Säure (Wein) a couple of weeks after you started Acids in wine was a clear indication to me. Tomas e (talk) 22:58, 10 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Heh, that's cool! It is kinda nice that we can all help each other by inspiring. Thanks for showing me that. :) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 04:22, 11 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Are you really surprised by this monitoring?--Symposiarch (talk) 10:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Not necessarily surprised but flattered. Wine has been deeply embedded into French and German culture for centuries longer than the English speaking world. To have the German and French wikis find inspiration in the wine articles on the English wiki is very exciting and I'm glad to be a part of the global team effort to make Wikipedia an outstanding resource for wine. :) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 04:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

There aren't "little" flareups. After the creation of the unwritten rules, they have been used ever increasingly with many people not feeling that they are appropriate. With those like Gatoclass acting as if they are the rules without them being the rules, this is a situation that needs to be remedied. The problems with the rules have always come up. I know that I led and worked with at least three discussions about them on this very talk page within the last two months. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Cirt (talk) 11:23, 31 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

BorgQueen (talk) 17:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Cirt (talk) 23:31, 31 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Gatoclass (talk) 15:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I want add the new voice of Spumante Robyc73 (talk) 17:59, 2 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please see WP:UNDUE. The proportion of coverage is in line with the popularity and global awareness of each style of wine. You may also want to look at the coverage allotted to each style in any number of reliable sources such as the Oxford Companion to Wine, Andre Domaine's Wine, Sotheby's Encyclopedia of Wine, The Wine Atlas, The Wine Bible, etc. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 17:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

If you prefer Champagne you can't censured the voice of Spumante.Robyc73 (talk) 20:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Um nobody is censoring anything. Spumante has a voice in the Sparkling wine article. And.....I would take a look at how your WP:POV and bias is coloring your editing. Again....I encourage you to read WP:UNDUE. We need to edit within Wikipedia policy and guidelines. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 03:48, 3 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

You've uploaded File:Dao bottle.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 01:53, 4 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

--Dravecky (talk) 20:11, 12 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Overall, I think that your additions to the Alexander Valley AVA article are great, but can I ask you to take another look at the Casino Controversy section (from the 2nd sentence on)? I'd clean it up myself, but I wasn't sure what you were trying to get at in several places. Thanks! Dori (Talk • Contribs) 22:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that User:Agne isn't taken. If you don't want the number in your name, you can request to rename your account at Wikipedia:Changing username/SUL. I just bring this up because every time I try to find you I have had trouble remembering the number 27, and I recently found that name changing mechanism. Alternatively you can create a new account "Agne" and redirect the pages to Agne27's pages.

If you're ever in the Amador County / Sierra Foothills area, let me know. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:46, 17 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

You know I'm not really sure why I added the number to my name. I think I may look into that link. As for your offer, I would love to drop you a line if I ever make it to that neck of the woods. If you ever want to explore Woodinville Wine Country up in my area, let me know. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 00:17, 26 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

DYKadminBot (talk) 17:51, 17 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dravecky (talk) 00:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dravecky (talk) 13:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Kudos on the Nebbiolo article, Agne; looks terrific.--Nwinther (talk) 15:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :) The article was long overdue. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 03:57, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well I'm certainly not a one man army. The work that you put in helps a lot too. :) Agne^Cheese/^Wine 03:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I must mention, I got a good chuckle from seeing the featured "Barbera vine" pic ;^) MURGH ^disc. 03:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

No kidding. I even searched my cellar to see if I had a single barbera, but alas no :( After I work my way through all the content related to-do list, the next big thing to work on will be images. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 03:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Dravecky (talk) 00:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Gatoclass 17:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Dravecky (talk) 10:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

SLO wine regions - Dolenjska wine region (south), largest region - is missing in this map. Ziga (talk) 08:11, 15 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well it wasn't in my sources. If you find and/or create an improved map, by all means use it. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 16:58, 15 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

--Dravecky (talk) 00:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I'm part of a research group at the University of Washington (Seattle campus), and my group is reaching out to Wikipedians in the Puget Sound area. We're hosting a focus group designed to gather information on what Wikipedians would like to know about each other when interacting on Wikipedia. Our end goal is to create an embedded application that helps people quickly know more about others' history and activity on Wikipedia, and we feel our design will be much more useful if it's based on insights of users like you.

I'm hoping that the chance to help out local researchers, to engage in lively face-to-face discussion with other Seattle Wikipedians, and to contribute to Wikipedia in a new way will entice you to join us. The session lasts 2 hours and snacks are provided - one is April 8 (Wednesday) starting at 6 pm and the other is April 18 (Saturday) starting at 10 am. (Sessions will be held on UW Seattle campus - directions will be sent after registration.) Your contribution will be greatly appreciated!

Willing and able to help us out? RSVP here. Want to know more? Visit our user talk page . Please help us contact other local Wikipedians, too! Commprac01 (talk) 03:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Just wanted to commend you on the Grenache-article. Looks very nice.--Nwinther (talk) 12:41, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Slowly but surely I'm working my way through the "Top Importance Articles". Agne^Cheese/^Wine 14:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)Reply