User talk:Beakerboy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Bozo The Clown Pez

Sure enough, that's Bozo on a dispenser; good catch. I do stand corrected. Though I have to say that one is one scary Pez! And for $150 - yikes! That one won't be joining my collection any time soon... :)

Wwagner 19:07, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Information about the Blue Moon beer copyvio

Hi Kevin,

I wanted to follow up with information you asked about regarding the copyright violation notice I listed on the Blue Moon beer article. I've put up exact info on the plagiarizations there on its talk page. I would recommend someone from the beer project deletes most of the article and re-write it from a clean slate, because it probably can be done.

Regards, Guroadrunner 04:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] YOGURT FLAVORED PEZ

I'm almost certain that i saw it on a reputible site. i don't have it handy, but i'll see if i can't find it soon and i'll give you the link. §Dr. Benjamin

Hmmm. It looks like you're right. I have a yogurt PEZ pack listed on PezBase Beakerboy 19:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for fixin my page and telling me how to keep my text on the page =) EditingFrenzy 00:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Beer

Hi. Please don't let User:Mikebe's incivility and edit warring prevent you from contributing to the beer articles. — goethean ॐ 19:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Beer project stuff

Hi,

I for one value your contributions to the beer project, so I hope you will decide to continue with it, despite the frustrations of this sort of conflict. I understand your position and I happen to agree with the broad gist of what should find its way into a beer article. While the debate does seemed to have reached an impasse (well, several), I think it should be possible to resolve, and I hope you'll stick around either to help resolve it or once an acceptable direction has been arrived at. I've added a few more related thoughts on the beer project talk page -- let me know if there's any service that would be useful in helping to resolve this. --Daniel11 09:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

I first wanted to tell you that I am very happy with your recent edits and that we seem to be quite close in seeing how the beer articles should be written. Perhaps when you have the time, you might start translating the Beer Style article into English (I would do it myself, but I am not so familiar with beer styles). I find it sad that it is now written only for brewers and that regular users of Wikipedia cannot use it.

Now, I hope you won't be too upset, but I am going to change some of your changes in the Tripel article. It is not true that some of the Trappist breweries have recently started brewing beers stronger than tripels -- Westvleteren introduced their "12" shortly before World War II and Rochefort introduced theirs in 1950. Although the trappist breweries communicate and cooperate with each other, they do not all make the same beers. This is another reason why tripel is not a style, but a naming convention.

I hope that we will continue to work toward the same goal here. Mikebe 15:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, please accept my apology. You are correct that I should have clarified rather than removed. Is that you who added the taste description? I find it quite strange. Mikebe 20:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes that is my edit. I forgot to log in. That's quote from the head brewer at Duvel. I've noticed the same thing...not the stomach ache, but that Belgian tripels are dryer and have less body than the bad American tripels. Good American tripels are on par, but not the smaller breweries.Beakerboy 20:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
OK, well I found it strange because I would not call Belgian (trappist) tripels very dry. The Westmalle is, but most of the others are not. I've never had an American one, so I can't compare them. But, I also find the comment strange "if too many are consumed to quickly". If it is 9.5 percent, who will be drinking many of them quickly? And I also don't understand the comment that Belgian tripels "are very easy to drink." Does he mean you can just keep drinking one after another? Considering that trappist tripels are probably the most complex beers in the world, the comment "easy to drink" does not seem to apply. I hope that these points show that the note isn't really helpful. Mikebe 20:43, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I'll get rid of that comment then. I just thought it was funny and worth noting the comment of a professional Belgian brewer on his impression of Belgian tripels vs. the American interpretation. Apparently the guy at Duvel drinks a lot. I'll put the exact quote word-for-word in the Tripel talk page tomorrow.
Cheers
Beakerboy 20:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Many thanks! I'll look forward to reading it. And, BTW, Duvel is one of my favourite beers -- I guess the brewer's too! Mikebe 21:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Witbier revert

Hello, Beakerboy;

I notice that you reverted the addition of a beer style infobox on the Witbier article with the edit summary "Removed wikibox per prior discussion". Sorry for being a bit dense here, but I've searched through your contribution history, the WikiProject Beer pages, and the talk page of the article, and the closest thing I can locate was a comment you posted on April 27 to the article talk page that you felt that the content was unnecessary and unreliable. I'm not sure that was what you were referring to, since it wasn't really a discussion if nobody responded to it, and don't want to get into a long-winded post to you if it just re-hashes old arguments from an old discussion that took place elsewhere. So before I address the specific points you've raised and address why I feel that your reversion was inappropriate, I wanted to inquire whether there was a discussion elsewhere that I've missed? A link would be helpful.

Looking forward to hearing from you, -- Neil916 (Talk) 06:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes the fact that nobody commented on it for 3 months indicates to me at least that nobody feels strongly enough to keep it. There has also been a bit of discussion on the topic in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Beer. The consensus is that the BJCP is an American organization and therefor really is only an authority on american beer. The Belgians don't typically think of beer in a style context and thus things there are more difficult to put a box around. For example, the info you put in the wikibox had an OG of 1.044-1.052. What if I make a wort with an OG of 1.053? would it nonger be a Witbeer...No It could still be even though it falls outside the numbers you state. The suggestion I made in the discussion is that instead of placing questionable numbers in the wikibox, create a new section that discusses in detail the brewing process for this particular beer style. Also you need to add proper sources for information. Like stated above, the BJCP is an American Homebrewing guideline and many times does not reflect reality. Instead of using it, try to find a regional source of the same info, or extrapolate it from commercial examples from the country of origin. For example, you can measure the FG of a few commercial Begian examples and enter it, and then use the ABV to calculate what the OG was. I've been a homebrewer for many years by the way, and I'll probably be getting my BJCP certicication this year, but I know the system isn't perfect. This seems to be a good balance between us and the international visitors to the english wikipedia.Beakerboy 11:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quadrupel

Hi,

I don't know if you've been following the discussion on the Quadrupel talk page, but it has become quite clear to me that even in the US it is no longer considered a beer style. The BJCP has apparently dropped it and the people who do the Great American Beer Festival also do not list it. Only Beeradvocate seems to clearly think it is a style, however, some BA members don't agree: http://beeradvocate.com/forum/read/1054087

Anyhow, I am going to nominate the article for deletion since no organisation even in the US (other than BA) calls it a style. Is this something you would agree with or do you have other information that I should know about? If you agree, would you be kind enough to join in the delete vote when the time comes? I hope so.

BTW, I noticed from a conversation on this page that you had some involvement with the article about Blue Moon. I had a chance to taste it a few years ago, so I was very surprised to see the article say: "Blue Moon is a somewhat typical example of a Belgian white ale." Has it really improved so much in the last few years? The sample I tasted several years ago was actually quite awful.

Now, I've got one complaint: you said that you were going going to post the interview with the brewer from Duvel (is that really Ommegang?) on the Tripel talk page, but I can't find it. I was really looking forward to reading it after some of the things you quoted from him. Well, if you have a chance (and still have access to it), I'd really appreciate if you'd post it.

Again, thanks. Mikebe 15:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I won't cry if it's deleted, but I'd vote keep because I have two concerns about removing it. First, the article WILL be made again. There is so much (mis)information out there that someone will say..."Why isn't there a Quadrupel article? I'll start one." And you'll have to keep deleting the article and having to explain your point of view. Also, If the article remains, then people will learn something about the debate and be able to speak about the beer they enjoy in a more informed and intellegent manner.
An alternative which may not have been discussed, would be to merge this article in with De Koningshoeven Brewery and redirect Quadrupel to De Koningshoeven Brewery. I definately think the content of the Quad article should remain somewhere, and being that it is only a few sentences, it wouldn't add any extra bulk to De Koningshoeven Brewery but would add insight.
As far as the Tripel comment goes...I used to have it written down somewhere but can't find it, and it was the head brewer from Duvel. I do have an audio interview with author Stan Hieronymus talking about the comments secondhand though.[[1]] I don't remember how far into the show it is, but if you listen to it maybe we can talk about it off wikipedia sometime. I'm sure there will be something you don't agree with.
Take Care Beakerboy 18:10, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, how about a shock: I agree with your idea. I like the idea of redirecting to La Trappe. I'm not sure how much information and which information should be added though. As I said, neither the BJCP or GABF people recognise quadrupel as a style, so it is not really a controversy anymore. The only point I would add is that Quadrupel is a beer and not a style.
OK, I'll listen to the recording. I have to tell you though, I don't know who this Stan Hieronymous is, but he strikes me a complete idiot! A friend of mine was recently given a bunch of American beer magazines by a visiting American and my friend loaned some to me. Anyhow there was an article by Hieronymous saying that American homebrewers or microbrewers are what are keeping the beer world alive and moving forward. He gave the impression that if it wasn't for these home/micro-brewers we'd all be drinking gruyt or wine. However, it did give my some insight into what I saw as the strange behaviour by some of the homebrewers here.
I'll try to listen to it tomorrow and leave a note for you here when I've finished.
Cheers Mikebe 19:13, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
As promised, I listened to the show today. There was a short bit where Stan talked about the Belgian brewers and what they said, but basically, as I recall, he said that some of the Americans weren't too happy with what they said -- he mentioned that one of the Belgians said that the American versions of Belgian beers are too sweet. The rest of the show was too technical for me (I am not a homebrewer), so I didn't pay much attention to it. If you are interested, here is a speech by Peter Bouckaert (New Belgium Brewery)[[2]] where he talks about styles. I suppose for American homebrewers it is quite normal, however, when European beer people see the BJCP style guide, for example, it is quite shocking! If you would like to talk more about this, it's fine with me. Cheers. Mikebe 16:38, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
Even if you are not a home brewer you can probably appreciate what he was saying about the simplicity of the recipes that the abbeys use. I'm just a big nerd when it come to anything I put in my mouth. I like to bake bread from scratch, I love to cook, and make beer. Some day I'd like to try my hand at honey and cheese.
You are quite right - I did listen to most of it, understand most of it and appreciate it. However, my "nerdishness" is limited to computers. I don't cook or make beer.
I've listened to the Peter Bouckaert one too and I really liked what he had to say. I can see and appreciate both sides of the "style" debate. "Artists" are just trying to create art, while the art critics and art historians then attempt to categorize it in order to make comparisons and discuss the influence and history of an individual in the grand scheme of "Art". This is the way I think about beer style and brewing in Belgium. German beer doesn't seem to suffer from too much beer art. The Germans seem to like to engineer their beer to specific guidelines, as in the Reinheitsgebot. America fascination with style is probably largely influenced by the fact that our industrial brewing history began with the German immigrants. Style is also a way of explaining to people what to expect in their beer. Most beer consumers don't pick apart the sensory experience they are having. They just think "I like this". If the "this" is called a porter, then they will want to find something else called a porter to try. If it's a Rochefort 6 that they like, they're not going to be happy of they try a Baltica 6 which is a porter. If however they have the concept of "Strong Belgian Dark Beer" Not as a style per se, but as a description of the beer, then they can find and compare and contract their drinking experience to other strong, dark, belgian beer. That's where I think the strength of styles comes in.Beakerboy 17:47, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I think you may be going a little too far with the idea of "artist." Most brewers (I know a few, not very many and not from big breweries) in Belgium and the Netherlands don't see themselves as artists, but as craftsmen. They also see themselves as members of the same family, or colleagues. When Pierre Celis had a fire in his brewery in the 1980s, for example, quite a few other brewers came to him and offered whatever help he needed.
Here, I don't know why, people don't talk about styles -- ever. If someone asks me about a beer, for example, I don't have to say that it is a Strong Belgian Dark (which is a meaningless name, btw), I can say that it is like a mixture of beer A and beer B or that it is like beer A but a little sweeter or lighter. I'm sure you get the idea. Also, Belgium has many different kinds of beer and, perhaps because there are no styles, people feel free to try any crazy idea they come up with! Quite a few years ago, someone came up with the idea of tobacco beer, for example.
BTW, have you ever been in Belgium? If so, where have you been? If not, why not? ;-)
The Germans are a tricky bunch. Until rather recently the Reinheitsgebot was only in Bavaria and the rest of Germany made some wonderful strange beers. It was only last year, for example, that I had my first Gose -- I loved it. Also last year, I had Zoigelbier for the first time, also wonderful! Also, I quite like Alt and Kölsch, which are not typical German pilsners. There is one of the best beer festivals in the world (!) in Berlin in about one week (http://www.bierfestival-berlin.de/). They get beer from all over Germany, plus many Czech beers and Baltic beers. It will really give you a different view of German beers. Of course, I don't expect that you can just fly over in a week, but they hold the festival every year, so you can plan now for next year.
Do you want to continue this by email? If you like, I can turn on the email in my user page and we can then continue. Cheers. Mikebe 18:36, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
My email is activated, so feel free to write me a short message and I'll email you back.Beakerboy 19:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
I sent you a mail yesterday evening (my time). Did you receive it? I would like to get your input on something and would rather do it off-line. If you need me to resend, I will. Cheers. Mikebe 06:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fake PEZ Space Gun

In reply to your question -- The information should be verifiable against published sources. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No_original_research. Has this been published somewhere publicly? In PCN perhaps? A message board or mailing list post from David would be better than nothing. - PxT 20:31, 11 September 2007 (UTC)