Talk:Barley wine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

redirects[edit]

Fixed redirect of "Barley Wine Ale" (was to Sprecher Brewery) to "Barley Wine". Not clear why Barley Wine Ale went to an article on a particular commercial producer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.76.245.157 (talk) 18:15, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Old Ale[edit]

In light of beer historian Martyn Cornell's assertion that there is no such style as Barley Wine, I suggest the material here be made a subsection of the Old Ale article. Farrtj (talk) 01:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, Michael Jackson wrote quite extensively on the barley wine style, so who to trust?--Chimino (talk) 04:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

alcohol, bitter?[edit]

I can't say I've ever heard of alcohol being described as 'bitter' before; ethanol certainly doesn't sasy such. --moof 08:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Enough hops can make a beer bitter, most particularly with India pale ale. As for barley malt, it tends to taste like alcoholic soy sauce. Yum yum... Afalbrig 06:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
You are correct. Alcohol adds no bitterness to the beer. It can change the mouthfeel of the beer by giving it a "slickness". It can also add a solvent-like character if the alcohol in question tends toward Fusel_alcohol. Bitterness comes from hops added early in the boil (hops added later in the boil provide flavor and aroma more than any significant bitterness) as well as certain dark roasted malts (such as found in stouts). Mumbly 22:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging[edit]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 04:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

how many is too many[edit]

As to avoid confusion later on and as a result of Patto1ro's multiple undos of adding new American style barley wines I would like to know how to determine when there are "enough" examples.

Currently there are 11 barley wines under England but Patto1ro seems determined to keep US at 8. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.116.15.6 (talk) 12:20, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


There was a discussion several months ago on the beer project talk page about listing more American copies of foreign beer styles than lists of the foreign producers themselves. It was agreed by the regular editors here that the number of American copies would always be less than the number of local producers. Logical, isn't it? I hope that answers your question. Mikebe (talk) 12:35, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


Classifying Barleywine as a "foreign" beer style is misleading - there are now more producers of Barleywine in the United States than there currently are in England, both in volume and variety. Here is a quote from Dick Cantwell and Fal Allen, authors of the book Barley Wine: History, Brewing Techniques, Recipes:

Continued commercial and tax pressures in Britain have relegated all but a few examples of the style to production history in the U.K., a golden age (tolerating deep copper and even russet examples) of barley wine brewing now reigns in America. Brewers here overdo it from summer to fall, producing beers bigger, maltier, hoppier and more alcoholic than anything existing in fact or history, or so hopes run. (http://www.beernotes.com/rockymtn/articles/000296.html)

I feel that listing some fairly obscure English Barleywine styles while omitting one or two of the most widely available American versions (notably, Great Divide's Old Ruffian) makes little sense, especially when one of the international styles listed (Nogne's Dark Horizon) is classed by the international beer community (and the brewery itself) as an Imperial Stout rather than a Barleywine.74.73.25.27 (talk) 13:05, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Another American here. I strongly agree with 74.73.25.27 that Old Ruffian merits inclusion. In this case, I don't see how it would be so bad for there to be nine American examples. An alternative might be to omit one of the U.S. beers already listed, but do any of the rest of you really think that's necessary this time? Again, 74.73.25.27 isn't overstating the case for Old Ruffian--it really is widely distributed here. Dunkelweizen (talk) 14:01, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
As a non-American, I don't have any objections to Americans selecting which beers to include. In the discussion I mentioned, it was said that the beers should be notable, which is a key requirement here on Wikipedia. But, American are, in this case in a much better position than I am to decide which American beers are notable. Again, the issue is how many, not which ones.
Barleywine is a British beer style as it was developed there. American breweries have copied the style. Whether there are more American, Danish or Japanese breweries making it than in the UK is completely beyond the point.Mikebe (talk) 14:22, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. At risk of going off topic, though, I wish I were academically equipped to tackle that last comment you made, regarding national origin and the identification of beer style with nation. Once beer styles emerge, they have a life of their own. If you open a brewery today and produce a barleywine, it would be no more authentic (let alone good) if you were British than if you were American. Dunkelweizen (talk) 14:39, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I can see Mike's point about having fewer examples of American barleywines as opposed to English ones, as the style was originated in England. But I think the problem with that argument is that this is not the "English-style Barleywine" wikipedia page. It is simply the barleywine page. Thus, any user coming to this page who wishes to be adequately informed in TODAY's world of barleywine might want to know the foremost examples of barleywine in ALL countries. I mean, listing fewer foreign examples because the style originated in England would be detrimental to the complete knowledge of barleywines as they exist today. (Also, in an analogy, should we go remove some examples of American hot dogs and sausages from the hot dogs and sausages page?)
And on another point: the whole argument about "how many is too many," firstly, I think assigning an arbitrary number to limit American listings or ANY country's listing is silly. Second, as a peaceful solution, could we not add the Old Ruffian AND add another English barleywine so that relatively, America will still have fewer styles listed? Willpang (talk) 14:51, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Personally, I don't see how this disturbs the balance that was agreed to earlier. Even with 9 American examples, the English ones still outnumber them, right? Dunkelweizen (talk) 14:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
The main point of the original discussion about number of examples wasn't per se about limiting the number of American examples. It was about stopping the style pages just turning into a list of every single beer brewed in a style. If I hadn't kept removing new additions there would now bhe over 30 US examples.

I think there are now too many English examples in the Barley Wine article. Ideally, there shouldn't be more than 8 examples of any style from any one country. Last time this was discussed there was a consensus that the numbers of examples should be limited. Is anyone seriously arguing that we should just let people keep adding their favourite beer in any particular style indefinitely? There has to be some sort of limit, otherwise the articles will turn into a complete mess.Patto1ro (talk) 15:04, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

What Patto1ro says is completely true. Another problem we have is that there are no editors here from, for example, Denmark who can update the Danish list. In other words, how can the list be "complete" if there are no editors from the other countries to supply the information? As to Willpang's comment about "informed about today's world of barleywines", let's not forget this is an encyclopedia, not a magazine. The whole point of the lists is to give examples, not a complete overview. Mikebe (talk) 15:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I think I can agree with both patto1ro and mike's points about wikipedia not being a source for lists. And understandably, if we allow for the continuation and additions of lists to continue, it could lead to cluttered information. I do, however, think that I got a little off topic, and I apologize for that. The original poster's point might have been that Old Ruffian is a beer that deserves to be put on the list, even at the cost of another lesser-known variety coming down. Since I will be the first to say I am in no position to make the call of which one should come down for Old Ruffian to go up, I say either let original poster decide and continue the discussion from there or have someone who is more-informed make the call.
I think the original concern was that the original poster was told simply that there are too many American examples, to which he/she didn't understand the logic. But if the argument is that there are too many examples ALL AROUND, it is still somewhat arbitrary but at least more fair. Willpang (talk) 17:17, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
As both Patto1ro and I have mentioned, there was a discussion about this on the project talk page several months ago. The edit summaries reflect that discussion. Yes, it is unfortunate that a more detailed summary can't be given, but for the people who do most of the work on these articles, it is quite clear. The OP, according to his contributions page, has never done anything here other than make the comment above.
And because you can't tell that I've made a contribution somehow my input is less important? People want to help but Wikipedia is a mess of systems that make sense to the insiders and is confusing to outsiders. And why would they be encouraged to learn the system if all they get back with their first edit is to be reverted? In end I guess what I am saying is that if there were several attempts to add new American barley wines to the list over the last year that all got the same response so instead of adding it back I wanted to have it documented in a place that would be easier for anyone who ran into the problem. By setting project guidelines that most of wikipedia readers/users are unaware of effectively stops or limits their ability to edit articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.116.15.6 (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
UGADawgGuy, is that you? If so, your browser signed you out. All the things you say are true. From the beginner's perspective, it is frustrating to try to jump in and be met with reverts, some or all of which can seem initially baseless. I know of some articles that are guarded by real assholes determined to protect "their" work. The most important antidote to this is the talk page. Many of these articles are watched by a small community of folks (including me--from now on, anyway) who have to come to a consensus about what shape the article will have. And any discussions about a particular article can be found on the talk page. Now, all of this will be here for future users to find. By the way, I just sent you a welcome on your user page, containing a number of links that might be helpful. Dunkelweizen (talk) 17:22, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
No, that wasn't me. And I'm far from a Wikipedia "beginner." I'm just new to signing my work here.UGADawgGuy (talk) 02:14, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
As for the examples, there are no fixed numbers. While, on the one hand, it might be nice if all the articles had the same number, on the other hand, there are always people coming along to add their favourite beer(s) to the list, which would mean constant editing. But, personally, I agree with you that there are too many examples. Mikebe (talk) 17:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it is unfortunate that a more detailed summary can't be given, but for the people who do most of the work on these articles, it is quite clear. The OP, according to his contributions page, has never done anything here other than make the comment above.
Willpang, don't let Mikebe's bullying incivility, which is a violation of Wikipedia policy, discourage you. That's just his way of saying hello. You have just as much right to contribute to the article as he or I do. — goethean 17:53, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, I guess deleting some of the English brands to shorten that list to the length of the American list is a fair enough compromise. Still, I'm not sure it had to come to that. Although I wasn't the first person to attempt to add Old Ruffian to the list of US barleywines, it appears that the repeated attempts at its inclusion sparked some discussion/negotiation, which is necessary for a user-edited site like this one. The fact is, there are some of us who, while relatively new to the Wikipedia "beer community," have legitimate and informed ideas about beer. Having made only a few contributions/edits doesn't necessarily mean the editor in question doesn't know his or her stuff. Anyway, I don't plan to press similar issues on other beer style articles on Wikipedia; most of my edits will be limited to grammatical corrections from here on out.UGADawgGuy (talk) 18:06, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
The point of my edits was to stop the example list getting too long. I have no problem with Old Ruffian being in the list. I realise that it's not always obvious what is going on in wikipedia, if you haven't seen previous discussions. The intention isn't to remove American examples, but to keep the lists under control.

A maximum of eight examples per country seems reasonable to me. What does everyone else think?Patto1ro (talk) 18:18, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, for the sake of keeping these lists from getting too long, let's keep it at eight. Dunkelweizen (talk) 18:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
8 sounds fine enough to me. Allow the general consensus of the many to decide which 8. If someone wants to put on a new one and take out the old one, let them do so, and possibly start a discussion if there is any dispute. We may look to beer review websites like beeradvocate and ratebeer as to which ones may be more deserving than others, with the idea of: availability and overall opinion on said beer. Sound good?
And I don't think mike was being a bully. Although I appreciate the backup. I understand his concern, as he (I'm sure) has put a lot of work into these pages. I don't mean to drop in and change as I see fit after he's done so much work. I just wanted OP's opinion to count as he seems upset that he wasn't given an adequate response or discussion to what he felt was a good contribution. Willpang (talk) 19:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Since we have agreed to this compromise, I would like to request that everyone help with seeing that it stays in effect. People come here regularly, sometimes even daily, to add their favourite beers to the examples lists. Let's all try to work together and remove those example that exceed the quota. Speaking for myself, I will only remove the latest examples of American beers (assuming the list is already full) and I will always rely on the American editors to decide which are the most notable examples. Onward and upward! Mikebe (talk) 09:22, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Dark Horizon?[edit]

Why is Dark Horizon listed as a barley wine? It really is an imperial stout. Even the brewery says so. The closest Norwegian beer has to be Nøgne Ø #100, although I would argue that that's really a double IPA. Strictly speaking there are no Norwegian barley wines. --LarsMarius (talk) 17:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

List of commercial barley wines[edit]

I've created a new article, List of commercial barley wines, where there need be no limitation on the number of examples from any country. The number of examples in the Barley wine article can be reduced to 5 or 10 or whatever. — goethean 03:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

The issue has been discussed and settled (twice). Space is not the issue. Please respect the decision of the consensus. Thank you. Mikebe (talk) 09:43, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
What is the issue? — goethean 14:34, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Just look above and all will be clear. Mikebe (talk) 15:55, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Let's see, I see uncivil, sarcastic remarks like this,
There was a discussion several months ago on the beer project talk page about listing more American copies of foreign beer styles than lists of the foreign producers themselves. It was agreed by the regular editors here that the number of American copies would always be less than the number of local producers. Logical, isn't it? I hope that answers your question
...but no reason for removing content from Wikipedia. — goethean 16:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

how many is too many, version 2.0[edit]

In the discussion above, we agreed to 8 examples per country as a compromise. I am now seeing that perhaps this is not the ideal number. We need to keep in mind that these are only examples and not meant to be a complete overview or list of all the beers of that sort. The number of 8 was chosen because that was how many examples (per country) were in the list at the time.

Since these are only examples, I propose that we reduce the number to something more reasonable (and not so arbitrary) like 3. For beer types where there are many countries, this will still be a rather lengthy list. For beer types where there are few examples, it won't make much difference.

Again, the point is these are only examples. How are more than three per country useful? Mikebe (talk) 10:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

A longer list is useful for a larger country (the U.S. for example) in which distribution is patchy. Having eight increases the chances that the reader will actually find some of the beers. My argument isn't a perfect one, of course, but there it is. Dunkelweizen (talk) 10:36, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
That's a perfectly valid point. I would respond by saying that we are only offering examples -- notable examples -- and, if people would like to try a particular type of beer, there are other websites where they can find that information. We also need to keep in mind that even though this is the English WP, it is being read by people all over the world (like me, for example), not only in English speaking countries. For that reason, the less local information, the more universal we are. Mikebe (talk) 13:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I would respond by saying that we are only offering examples -- notable examples -- and, if people would like to try a particular type of beer, there are other websites where they can find that information.
"there are other websites where they can find that information" is not a valid reason to remove content from Wikipedia. I urge you to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policy. — goethean 14:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Is there a particular policy you have in mind? If so, could you point it out? That might be helpful. Dunkelweizen (talk) 15:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
WP:NOTPAPERgoethean 16:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I must have missed it - where does it say that all possible content must included? Mikebe (talk) 16:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
His point seems to be that it can, not that it must. Dunkelweizen (talk) 17:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Goethean, please read WP:CON. You will also note that WP:NOTPAPER is not without restrictions, including this situation. Mikebe (talk) 17:46, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
This is silly. I fail to see the purpose of reneging on a mutually agreed-upon compromise, other than to assert personal authority over beer-related matters on Wikipedia. Seriously -- there is no rational reason to limit the number of style examples beyond the already-rather-restrictive eight per country. Beyond that, it is clear that the vast majority of barleywines are brewed in England and the U.S. Please, just leave it as-is. There's no compelling reason not to. I see no history of complaints that the current list is too long.UGADawgGuy (talk) 02:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I tend to think that when the list is longer than the rest of the article, there's a problem. Either the history and characteristics should be expanded, of the list should be culled. I personally like the consensus that was reached in the Tripel article between Mikebe and others...myself included. We decided that the country of origin should be highlighted with the most examples. There we did Trappist, Abbey, and Foreign. Foreign includes all non-Belgium examples. This way the article is an article in an encyclopedia, not a list. People can find lists anywhere, and the article should reference this. Also, the style statistics are bad. When you say style statistics, it sounds like a prescription, not a description. An encyclopedia should follow the latter, and if the former is used, a citation should follow...And you'll not find a valid one for this style in it's country of origin.Beakerboy (talk) 21:28, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi Beakerboy. It's nice to see you back here again! I have actually been thinking about this recently, and I think the best solution is no examples. Why? Because this is an encyclopedia, this is NOT ratebeer or some other beer fan site, where they do that sort of thing. Secondly, all examples will be local, so there is not way of offering a list that will include everywhere. Thirdly, as Beakerboy points out, articles where the list of examples is longer than the article (of which there are quite a few) look like lists with a bit of writing on top. And finally, no matter how many we agree is the correct number of examples -- whether it's one or a hundred -- someone will come and add their own local beer. I am not, of course, talking about articles where a beer is part of the description. Let's work on the articles instead editing the lists every few days. Mikebe (talk) 18:44, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

It is as simple as this; It should be the Top Ten Best Selling Barley Wine Beers per country. That way it is kept to an intelligent number, not just 'hey there at 8 right now, derrrr.' People will also not feel the need to add their favorite beer to the list, because, instead of appearing incomplete, it will be complete. Period. - discnchips —Preceding unsigned comment added by Discnchips (talkcontribs) 05:39, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

BJCP[edit]

Without objections, I shall link this aticle to the BJCP. BJCP (talk) 22:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I object.Patto1ro (talk) 05:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Why do you object? Because it wasn't your idea? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.61.242 (talk) 04:06, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Editors, please give reasons, there is too much adding and reverting going on. 1Z (talk)

List removed[edit]

This article had very little prose and a huge list of brands. Remove the brands and we get a stub. It looked like a promotional section in that form. I would have no objection to a separate list article hat-noted from this article (List of commercial barley wines) but the list was outweighing article material. This article needs improvement in prose form.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 13:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Good call; the last thing we need are more in-article lists on Wikipedia. They can go to BeerAdvocate or other websites for beer style examples/lists.--Chimino (talk) 15:02, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Supposed Greek "origin" overemphasized[edit]

First, I would venture that the ancient Greek word for a malt beverage that translates as "barley wine" is not a direct etymology for the English style of barley wine, and the latter term likely arose completely independently, and is only coincidentally similar. Second, there is quite a lot of evidence that heavy fermented barley malt beverages originated in Egypt and/or the Fertile Crescent and predate Greek brewing, so to say this so-called "style" originated in Greece is historically incorrect. Third, I have spent quite a lot of time in Greece and can tell you heavy top-fermented beers are nowhere to be found in modern Greece, any beer you get there is going to be a light pale yellow effervescent beer, like a Pils, like Fix or Mythos. Finally, even the article itself says that common barley wines found now are nothing like the ancient Greek style, so to claim that the Greek barley wine and English style barley wines are one "style" is preposterous. Mmyers1976 (talk) 20:37, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Bass (UK) was the first modern barley wine. Was this a ploy to get around wine taxes,and to supply Englishmen with their "substance" requirements cheaply?? There were wine taxes for many years since wine was mostly imported. Being made of grain, it was classed as beer, which has always been cheap in the UK. In Australia, the beer and spirit excise increases quadratically with alcohol content; 0c to 100c/au for beer and 100c/au for scotch. For example, Duvel is $30 per four-pack of 330mL bottles. A $35 bottle of scotch is $22 of excise, $3.50 of tax, and $9.50 for the vendor. (Aus wine excise is so small it is non-existent; 5c/au.) In Californica, "beer" is a max of 3%, else is must be called "liquor".203.87.118.239 (talk) 23:48, 8 March 2018 (UTC)