Talk:Budweiser: Difference between revisions
→Requested move: comment |
|||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
*Only one article in the list is called simply "Budweiser", i.e. [[Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch)]]. The others are partial title matches whose relevance ''vis-à-vis'' that Budweiser could be considered less, in the spirit of [[WP:Partial title match]]. — [[User talk:AjaxSmack|<span style="border:1px solid #000073;background:#4D4DA6;padding:2px;color:#F9FFFF;text-shadow:black 0.2em 0.2em 0.3em"><font face="Georgia"> '''AjaxSmack''' </font></span>]] 01:47, 29 July 2014 (UTC) |
*Only one article in the list is called simply "Budweiser", i.e. [[Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch)]]. The others are partial title matches whose relevance ''vis-à-vis'' that Budweiser could be considered less, in the spirit of [[WP:Partial title match]]. — [[User talk:AjaxSmack|<span style="border:1px solid #000073;background:#4D4DA6;padding:2px;color:#F9FFFF;text-shadow:black 0.2em 0.2em 0.3em"><font face="Georgia"> '''AjaxSmack''' </font></span>]] 01:47, 29 July 2014 (UTC) |
||
*'''Oppose''' per IJA. Instead I suggest that the trademark dispute article be made primary, as the most educational topic. -- [[Special:Contributions/65.94.169.222|65.94.169.222]] ([[User talk:65.94.169.222|talk]]) 05:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 05:19, 29 July 2014
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Budweiser article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Off flavors comment
"...giving it more time to reabsorb and process green beer flavors, such as acetaldehyde and diacetyl, that Anheuser-Busch believes are off-flavors which detract from overall drinkability..."
It is not debated that those chemicals are off flavors at all. There are no styles where acetaldehyde (green apple) flavor is acceptable, and only a handful of beer styles where diacetyl is acceptable (always in very small amounts). You could consult the Beer Judge Certification program style guide (www.bjcp.org) as a source for desired flavors in beer.
I only say all this because I think the clause"anheuser-busch believes..." should be removed since it implies that only AB considers them flaws and they are otherwise not generally considered flaws. Seems almost biased against AB. You could completely remove that clause and still keep the entire meaning of the rest of the statement. 76.100.114.214 (talk) 01:35, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Meaning?
"The Czech Budweiser is sold in some countries as Budejovicky Budvar but is known as Budweiser throughout." Thoughout what or where? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.225.37.107 (talk) 05:17, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
File:Budweiser beverage delivery truck Romulus Michigan.JPG Nominated for Deletion
An image used in this article, File:Budweiser beverage delivery truck Romulus Michigan.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011
| |
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC) |
Vandalism
I believe this article may have been vandalized. I believe someone replaced Adolphus Busch with Jack Burrell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.50.119.143 (talk) 23:34, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
File:A bottle of Budweiser.JPG Nominated for Deletion
An image used in this article, File:A bottle of Budweiser.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC) |
hey,30% or 80% rice ?
I remember a few years ago is 80% rice , why 30% now ? Anheuser Busch was one of them. They survived by converting to cereal beer made from non-fermentable grains like rice. Anheuser still makes its Budweiser from 80% rice, unlike the traditional all-malted barley beer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.111.235.43 (talk) 07:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
You really need a citation for that. Any beer with 80% rice would be virtually unfermentable. Rice has almost no sugar so it would be next to impossible to make a ~4% abv beer with 80% adjunct 76.100.114.214 (talk) 01:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Italics
Why is Budweiser italicized throughout the article? Yes, it is a foreign word, but we don't italicize other brand names. Hot Stop talk-contribs 15:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- Good question, it's half italics, half not italics. CTJF83 15:36, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
- I went ahead an changed it. Hot Stop talk-contribs 15:49, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
"Even Adolphus Busch didn't like it.." Is this credible?
This comment, located under the "Beer" section, cites this article, but the article does not cite any credible source (it actually has no citation.) The article, from Salon.com, says, "Adolphus Busch, the dynasty’s founder, called his beer “dot schlop” and drank wine instead.", but I cannot find any information beyond this (except for internet hearsay.) Unless this is a credible claim, and someone has a more credible source, I think that comment should be taken out because it adds little to the article and cannot be verified. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.18.97.24 (talk) 07:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC) *Edit - forgot to sign* 99.18.97.24 (talk) 08:03, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
I would vote in favor of removing the comment. 76.100.114.214 (talk) 01:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- It's a slander. Busch may well have preferred to drink wine (so what) but the "dot schlop" comment was really a *self-deprecating joke* that he made when a dinner companion ordered a Budweiser in his presence. He wasn't going around secretly cackling about getting the rubes to drink "dot schlop." He was *making a joke.* (the source is *American Mercury*, 1929, quoted [here.](http://www.beerhistory.com/library/holdings/kingofbeer3.shtml)
- Yeah, Bud is quite bland, but anyone who thinks you can hide bad ingredients or technique in such a bland beer doesn't know anything about brewing. It's a boring beer made very well. 99.249.15.40 (talk) 04:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Adding information about cans under the "Containers and packaging" section
The current article goes into some depth about the Budweiser bottle, but almost entirely ignores other types of packaging. I was planning on adding information specifically related to Budweiser can packaging. Much of this information will be tailored to look at the latest can design change that occurred in 2011, as well as the reasons and possible consequences of the change. Also, I plan on adding a chart, similar to that under the "Bottle" section, for the can. Zlaval (talk) 00:30, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
- As long as you provide proper sourcing sounds like a plan to me. CTJF83 11:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Brazilian's Budweiser bill=
After numerous deaths in football stadiums, Brazil passed a law in 2003 outlawing alcohol sales in stadiums. FIFA demanded that Brazil allow alcohol sales at the World Cup because Budweiser is a major World Cup sponsor and so it can make Budweiser the "Official Beer of the FIFA World Cup", a role it has played since 1986. In response, Brazil passed a law paving the way for alcohol sales in the World Cup, nicknamed the "Budweiser Bill".[1][2]
How can this be added to the article? Should it be added to Anheuser-Busch? Wholesomegood (talk) 05:05, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- ^ Brazil Moves To Ease Soccer Beer Ban, As World Cup Spat With FIFA Grows, NPR (March 07, 2012).
- ^ Brazilian Senate approves ‘Budweiser bill’ ending dispute with FIFA over World Cup sponsoring, Merco Press, (May 10, 2012).
Requested move
The request to rename this article to Budweiser has been carried out.
If the page title has consensus, be sure to close this discussion using {{subst:RM top|'''page moved'''.}} and {{subst:RM bottom}} and remove the {{Requested move/dated|…}} tag, or replace it with the {{subst:Requested move/end|…}} tag. |
– By hit count or by links, the American beer is far and away the primary topic for the English-speaking world pbp 13:23, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- On the face of it oppose - there's no one topic that outnumbers all others put together. but what is going on here? In ictu oculi (talk) 14:58, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support, clear primary topic among a collection of also-rans. bd2412 T 15:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Support. Clear cut primary topic. Calidum Talk To Me 15:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - Both are big selling beers with very similar names, the current disambiguation works just fine. There is no evidence to suggest that either is the primary topic as search results will bring up both beers in the search results. Also moving the American beer to the article "Budweiser" would be making Wikipedia take sides in the "Budweiser trademark dispute" and Wikipedia should remain neutral on such issues and not favour either side. IJA (talk) 19:35, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose IJA makes a very good case. WP should remain neutral bearing in mind the long-running trademark dispute. Edwardx (talk) 21:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- A trademark dispute is a poor reason for dictating naming conventions. The dispute is between a large beverage company that gets a lot of hits and is referenced by a lot of other articles; and a smaller beverage company that isn't. pbp 21:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Only one article in the list is called simply "Budweiser", i.e. Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch). The others are partial title matches whose relevance vis-à-vis that Budweiser could be considered less, in the spirit of WP:Partial title match. — AjaxSmack 01:47, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose per IJA. Instead I suggest that the trademark dispute article be made primary, as the most educational topic. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 05:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- C-Class Food and drink articles
- Unknown-importance Food and drink articles
- WikiProject Food and drink articles
- C-Class Beer articles
- High-importance Beer articles
- WikiProject Beer articles
- C-Class Missouri articles
- Mid-importance Missouri articles
- C-Class St. Louis articles
- High-importance St. Louis articles
- WikiProject St. Louis Culture working group
- Unassessed Brands articles
- Unknown-importance Brands articles
- WikiProject Brands articles
- Requested moves