This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Food and drink High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Food and Drink task list: edit history watch purge To edit this page, select here Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink: Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish Participate in project-related deletion discussions. Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this. Add the ((WikiProject Food and drink)) project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here. Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages. Wine (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wine, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.WineWikipedia:WikiProject WineTemplate:WikiProject WineWine articles

I know degustation is French for tasting, but my understanding was that there was something of an order you should procede with in order to ensure that the taste of the previous wines don't over power the next sample.

True, I will adjust--Gsherry 00:43, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Or place the same warning under subjects like arithmetic and language. Despite being someone that is mot the least bit of interest in wine I found the article extremely informative and enlightening. I believe that wine tasting is a broad subject, approaching the subject like this informative wiki article is the correct way. I presume, that given an unidentified wine, an expert taster, using only his senses and his memory, can pick out the grape variety, the wine's vintage, its region of origin, even the specific winery that produced it. The article describes the process; this shouldn't be misinterpreted as tutelage. It clearly is notAruhnka (talk) 08:47, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use common names. See [{Wikipedia:Naming conventions]]. Gene Nygaard 17:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. The term "wine degustation" is laughable. Zaian 22:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The term "wine degustation" is rarely used. — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-01-10 22:51

This article has deteriorated from an overview on tasting wine, to a narrow discussion primarily focused on spitting wine out. Must have been edited by a beer drinker!

• This article needs to be proof-read by someone with half a brain. Sentence fragments are abundant and I nearly threw my laptop out the window after trying to get through the entire article. Someone please help this for the sake of wine.* April 5th, 2007 !!!

I would like to remove the new evaluation section. The grammar is poor, it doesn't talk about actual evaluation and it's points -- subjectivity of tasting, temperature, etc -- are uncited. Objects? Gsherry 00:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, reading that section made me come to the talk page. Go ahead and remove it. PeterMottola 02:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me, or is this article a little bit too much How-to guide and not enough encyclopedia? I really have absolutely zero knowledge of the subject, so I'm not exactly sure how it could be improved, either. Although I can forsee some eventual cutting down, I think that doing that now would be very bad. This probably includes what Gsherry was talking about. -- Anaraug 08:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has been proposed that Wine serving temperature into Wine tasting:

• I agree that it should be merged somewhere, but wine temperature is broader than wine tasting. I would prefer somewhere else but not sure where. So, if nobody can suggest a better place, I support this merge. --Bduke 21:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - sort of, I think it would fit in better with the main Wine article but could live with it merging in here. FlagSteward 13:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - as FlagSteward says, it belongs in Wine more than wine tasting. i oppose this merge. Spudzonatron 11:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support partial merge - come on, that wine serving temperature article is only, like, 3 sentences! It could easily be merged into both articles without danger of redundant duplication. The temperature table seems like a violation of WP:NOR to me; subjective and open to disagreement, so it should be deleted. -Amatulic 22:40, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Of the related merges discussed here and below. this is the only one not resolved. Can we get consensus? If it is to be merged to Wine that article needs tagging. Or should we be bold, delete the table as suggested above and just merge the rest into both, making Wine serving temperature a redirect, possibly to Wine? --Bduke 08:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• I went ahead with the merger since it seemed like discussion was over. Nanobri (talk) 05:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It has been proposed that Vertical and horizontal wine tasting into Wine tasting:

• Support. Agree completely. --Bduke 21:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Action - merge. With this and the next two, I've just copy and pasted, so they need a copy edit to clean them up - and may not justify being in separate sections for instance. FlagSteward 13:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been proposed that Blind wine tasting into Wine tasting:

• Support. Agree completely. --Bduke 21:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Blind wine tasting is little more than a paragraph, and an incompletely referenced one at that. Nunquam Dormio 20:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Makes complete sense. ◄scharks► 22:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Action - merge, needs copy edit FlagSteward 13:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been proposed that Tasting flight into Wine tasting: —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bduke (talk • contribs) 21:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

• Support merge. It would be a lot clearer for readers to have the material in one place. --Bduke 22:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Support all of the above. These clearly originated as different approaches to the various facets of the same thing and all of them would be clearer in a broader wine tasting context. mikaul^talk 13:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Action - merge, needs copy edit FlagSteward 13:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a request on the Wine Project homepage to create an article on Wine tasting descriptors. Personally I don't see the need other than as a potential splinter from this article, and I don't think we're there yet, so I'm tempted to delete the request and Opppose creation of the new article. Any other views? FlagSteward 12:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Support makes perfect sense to me. mikaul^talk 23:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose a simple page reiterating wine tasting basics and a list of common descriptors with grapes seems like not too much work. and a central facet of tasting that is too large (if covered properly) for a section of the current page. VanTucky 00:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose dedicated wine references have struggled to produce objective resources on this topic and have not succeeded.
  • I would agree with the thrust of your comment, as (I think) the original proposer would - it suggests you support the deletion of the request to create an article on Wine tasting descriptors, or am I reading you wrong..? (Please sign/date your posts with 4~s, just like I forgot to do:)) mikaul^talk 08:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I understand User:VanTucky's desire to have a list of descriptors and agree that anything comprehensive along these lines would be waay to big, but would propose that it be no more that that: a WP:LIST, not an article, to avoid overlapping info. mikaul^talk 08:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I would oppose creation of the article for WP:OR and WP:NOT concerns. Trying to get this current article to conform to Wikipedia policy and not sound a How to taste wine guide will be challenging enough as it is. Even as a list, the proposed article will be hopelessly difficult to maintain. An unfathomable amount of English words can be used to described wine and the OR and POV concerns of what to include vs what not to include is a lot of headaches for little practical benefit. Wikipedia is not a wine guide and we do not need to make a tutorial on how to taste wine and what words should be used. If we do a good job on this article, there will be plenty of references and further reading links at the bottom that a curious reader can go to and learn how to taste wine. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 09:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I too think a WP:LIST is a good idea. That way it stays clear of becoming a how-to guide, and provides vital info. What I meant by a small intro, was not a how-to, but an explanation of why a list of descriptors needs to exist and why the terms included arent just any adjective that could possibly describe a flavor. There are many key descriptors for grapes that are not exactly clear what they mean without a def. Words like "mineral-drenched", "oakey", or "petrol" either mean a bit more than just what the word would imply literally or they may need cross-cultural definition. Wine tasting, as a very subjective experience that is very hard to verbalize for the beginner, has a set of traditional descriptors that are a very important part of communicating just what you mean. Rather than sit around trying to define what the flavor of "tree-like" means to others, we say "oakey" and immediately it implies a whole nuance of flavor and terroir that just isnt implied by a different word. VanTucky 17:20, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Bah - I hate that kind of ambiguity, so I'm really sorry about the confusion at the top of this section - I've edited it a bit to make it clearer. But it looks like we have a consensus, so I've deleted the request on the To Do list, if someone wants to set up a WP:LIST for Wine tasting descriptors, go ahead. FlagSteward 16:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm....I've beginning to rethink my original stance on the creation of such an article. I still have some OR concerns and I wonder if such an article could be created and tied into sound reliable sources. What got me to think more favorably by this was the realization that when a wine characteristics list a wine as sounding "powerful", there is really is nothing to link to that would clue a reader into what exactly that means. Unfortunately there are many terms that mean different things to different people which is another challenge. I'm in a spry mood tonight so I will poke around and see what kind of sourcing that such a list could have. I will say though that Mick has done an outstanding job in improving this article since April. Tremendous work. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 09:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've just added three refs and removed the "unreferenced" tag. While the descriptors in this section don't correlate to any one source, I think it's probably quite appropriate that they can (all? I've checked through the main grapes) be found among these more elaborate, online sources while making no attempt at being a definitive list. Despite hinting at this in the intro, I'm concerned that the very subjective nature of this kind of information might not be clear. In any event, no amount of refs is ever going to make it less so, and those I've provided are enough to show the range and depth of descriptors in common use, IMO. mikaul^talk 18:52, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs more than a copyedit. Some of the content is repetitive and a good deal of it has untenable amounts of POV and OR, but mostly it's just presented in an inconsistent way: there are six sections, including "Glassware", before "The wine tasting process", for example. The current order is:

1. Blind tasting
2. Vertical and horizontal tasting
3. Tasting flights
4. Serving temperature
5. Glassware
6. Order of tasting
7. The wine tasting process
8. Expectoration
9. Visiting wineries
10. Attending Wine Schools
11. Grape Varietals

A few things simply shouldn't be there: I can see little in Expectoration, Visiting wineries or Attending Wine Schools which can't be absorbed into other sections, if anywhere, and I'm not clear as to the value of a "connoisseur wine tasting" subsection – isn't this the theme of the whole article? I propose re-jigging the sections to flow better from an examination of the main tasting process onwards:

1. The wine tasting process
2. Order of tasting
3. Tasting flights
4. Blind tasting
5. Vertical and horizontal tasting
6. Serving temperature
7. Glassware
8. Grape Varietals

If there are no objections, I'll get onto it. mikaul^talk 23:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article caries a tag disputing its neutrality. However, I can't detect any evidence from this page to suggest that there is actually any dispute over neutrality. If there isn't, shouldn't this tag be removed?David Justin 02:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article got a POV tag in this edit without any explanation or discussion on the talk page. I have just removed the tag. -Amatulic 17:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, probably my fault, I should have removed it after a later copyedit removed the offending material. I might even get round to the rest of the article one day.. --mikaul^talk 17:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no information on Wikipedia that I can find on, what I like to call, the thinking-something-tastes-better-because-it-should-taste-better effect:

• http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/02/24/grape_expectations/
• http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/07/dining/07pour.html?_r=1&em&ex=1210478400&en=eaa4f6dd12aa403a&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin
• http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-9849949-39.html
• http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/food_and_drink/article3177658.ece

I do not know the real name for this effect, and maybe it need not even be mentioned in the wine tasting article (maybe it should), but it definately should be somewhere on Wikipedia.

Lanma726 (talk) 00:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a controversy section needs to be added detailing the evidence that there is little agreement on "good" or "bad" wines or perceived value? Turkeyphan^t 14:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go Wine Tasting [4 Tips for Wine Tasting]http://www.gowinetasting.com/4-tips-for-wine-tasting.php

Danison (talk) 21:42, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this blog link is needed per or external links policy. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 22:17, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blog links are generally discouraged, as are links to people's own personal web pages. This seems to be both. Furthermore, an external link needs to enhance the content of the article somehow, by including useful information beyond the scope of the article. This link doesn't do that, either. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should blind tasting also include some comment on re-sampling, or or tasting the same wines a second time? The idea is to further minimize the effects of prejudice by having the judges taste some or all of the wines a second time. A Judge might be served three wines in scrambled order A, B, C, B, A, C. The duplicate scores can then be averaged, or at least examined for consistency.

Another technique is to give the wines to the judges in different orders, so that one judge's reaction does not influence on another's. Judge One gets A, B, C, Judge Two gets B, C, A, Judge Three gets B, A, C.

And of course Double Blind, where the neither the Judges nor the Servers know what is being presented, is a well known technique to reduce bias.

Yes I know the article is nor supposed to be How-To, but the varying techniques can really effect the outcome, and it is important to understand the biases, the effects they can have, and how to counter them.

--Wolfram.Tungsten (talk) 01:21, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If there are sources that describe the different ways blind tasting is performed for wine, then I think a short description of the differences would have encyclopedic value to this article. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wine tasting is itself a category within Category:Oenology. — Robert Greer (talk) 22:56, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about category organization but the two concepts are very different and they should be separate. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 03:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed an external link per WP:EL, posting here as its removal was disputed:

• http://www.delongwine.com/tasting-form-de-long.pdf - a wine tasting notes form. The form does not expand on the understanding of the content of the article - instead, it provides a sample of what can be found on any number of sites (findable via the dmoz link). The selected form also contains a fairly obtrusive advertisement at the bottom of the form.

The site clearly fails WP:EL, and the promotional content adds a second issue of using a link to this particular form unfairly causes WP to place one retailer over others by choosing this form over any others. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 15:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I'd wager that over half the time when a new or anonymous IP inserts a link, it's for promotional purposes. Wikipedia isn't anybody's advertising channel. ~Amatulić (talk) 17:01, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

t, light, and faulty."[4]

, spicy, supple, deep."[5] Both Dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.187.199.192 (talk) 20:10, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following link is dead: # ^ Frédéric Brochet Tasting. A study of the chemical representations in the field of consciousness But something very similar or maybe exactly the same articole can be found at: [1] Wentu (talk) 08:32, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]