Originally posted by imdownthepub
Originally posted by Fin
Impressed with the level of housekeeping done here, thanks Glen and Lazypyro. However one query, with number 3 the Northern Monk Little Leeds Beerhouse (LLB) removal of the slash as the latter are not a brewer, how does that sit with all of the Brewdog current collabs'? Ok so Brewdog themselves are brewers but not each of their individual sites would claim to be, and besides LLB has done other collabs' with Runaway on a couple of occasions so they may well be more into the brewing side than we know. Sorry I'm not being picky at all just querying and suggesting that LLB may have more right to have their slash reinstated than others having it in the first place. Completely happy to be shot down in flames though.
As far as I know, and in previous discussions with Admins the slash was put in place for Collaborations between what we believe or understand to be Brewers. I haven't seen the recent Brewdog beers recently added so I'm not sure if these have been added and released incorrectly and I do know that there are probably a lot of examples that have slipped through, but I do prefer to stick to what we have previously agreed. So for me LLB are staying unslashed.
There are a few other beers that have slashes in front of collaborators that aren't necessarily brewers, will have a search later but I am sure that some of the Northern Monk Patrons Projects beers are falling foul of this, not that it really matters but if you guys want consistency then there might be some changes to make there.
Regarding the BrewDog beers, for what it's worth BrewDog themselves said all the collabfest beers should be added under the brewery in charge of the collab, with BrewDog added as a collaborator, even though it was local bars that were collaborating and not the actual BrewDog brewing team. This was for Untappd who they were liaising with due to a badge, but it's reasonable to assume they wished for the same thing to happen on RB and BA too. I'm not an admin though so it's not for me to say whether or not we should ignore their wishes or not, but personally at least for readability reasons and with BrewDog being known as a brewer I think it's best to keep the slashes. In the past there have been non-collabfest beers done with particular BrewDog bars that have a slash. |
Some more minor housekeeping. The Cloudwater DIPA V series beers can all be retired as we know that series has ended and won't be coming back. 1-5 are already done but 6-13 are still active. https://www.ratebeer.com/Ratings/Beer/ShowBrewerBeers.asp?BrewerID=22393
Re: NMBC... the Patrons Project stuff needs more of a cleanup than I thought. I just went through every single one of the beers - 3 of them need names editing (they included photographers/artists as part of the name which I don't think we should be putting there), while a whopping 17 of them have no commercial description (or need it updating to a proper one). Normally I wouldn't place so much importance on descriptions but I think these beers are all worthy of having one given their collaborative nature with members of the creative community there, the non-brewing people involved deserve some recognition for their input.
Not all but I think most of the beers are posted about on NMBC's blog and/or Facebook page. Some will require paraphrasing and/or cutting and pasting to get a more concise description but for the most part all the info we need is there. I'm happy to go through some of these later today. I suspect posting that many descriptions on the forums for one of you to copy paste in is going to hit the character limit so I'll probably put it all in a text file and post the link here for one of you to go through when you have the time.
In the meantime, here are the 3 which you may want to name edit (I don't necessarily disagree with including their names, but all the other beers in this project don't include artist/photographer names in the title, instead mentioning their work in the description, so I suggest this for consistency reasons)
1. https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/northern-monk-james-butler-marble-patrons-project-303-black-hole-sun/528444/
Remove "James Butler" - tattoo artist who designed the label
2. https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/northern-monk-nomad-clan-patrons-projects-202-peanut-butter-and-jelly-brown/460630/
Remove "Nomad Clan" - they are street muralists who designed the label
3. https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/northern-monk-striding-edge-patrons-projects-501-light-ipa/494489/
This one is genuinely misnamed. Striding Edge is the name of the beer, not a collaborator. The collaborator is actually Ricky Lightfoot (a fell runner), whose name will be included in the description once I post it here later for adding.
Correct name: Northern Monk Patrons Projects 5.01 Striding Edge Light IPA
|
Originally posted by LazyPyro
Regarding the list of West by Three beers in 10) I meant that they could be changed to a Series (as all their other Pilot Series beers are), not an actual season. It's just that when we add a beer the Series option is for some reason under the Season dropdown which is why I used that word.
I don't really like the Series designation. I don't see the point of it. If you have a number of beers from a brewery called Single Hop [insert hop name here] it's pretty self-evident that they constitute a series so what does designating them as such actually tell you? Presumably they could be part of a Series AND a Seasonal/Regular/One-off beer anyway. What we really want from those designations (or, at least, I do) is to know if, and when, a beer is likely to be available. Is it a permanent beer? Or a one-off? Does it appear occasionally to no set schedule? Does it appear regularly at a particular time of year and, if so, when? The list of options - which are somewhat ambiguous and not mutually.exclusive, but you can only select one - has never been fit for purpose. That's why we started putting what we knew of that sort of information in the commercial description box all those years ago (in the UK). There were far fewer beers around back then so it was feasible to do the detailed research to establish that information fairly reliably in most instances. Now it's impossible. A change to the "seasonal" categories now would not be feasible because of the huge amount of data cleansing that would have to be done on the crappy information alredy in the database. Since you can't search or filter on the information and have to click through to each and every beer to see it, it's usefulness is severely restricted anyway. So, all in all, it's not really something worth getting too bothered about. |
|
|
I must admit I completely agree with you Chris, on all the points you mentioned. And the strange thing is these exact problems exist on UT and I think BA too. Now that I think about it it's odd that none of these sites allow you to search/filter on such designations, and that none of them present the options when adding/editing as multiple choice checkboxes, in the event that a beer is both part of a series AND a seasonal rather than year-round/core range.
But anyway I was merely suggesting those updates to keep them in line with the rest of the series, and because there were relatively few of them in comparison to longer-established brewers. I've not bothered submitting corrections for Series stuff before. |
Originally posted by LazyPyro
The Cloudwater DIPA V series beers can all be retired as we know that series has ended and won't be coming back.
Beers that are no longer in production should be retired one year after their latest release unless they are festival specials or the like, only available at a particular event, in which case they may be retired immediately. This is an imperfect compromise between basing retirement on production/release and on whether they are still around - more likely to be the case with bottles/cans. Availability is a rather more useful yardstick for users but that's not the way it works here - lots of beers that haven't been made for a very long time can still be found if you know where to look.
In practice it's just not feasible to keep up with all that stuff. There's probably a very large proportion of "active" beers in the database that really should be retired. |
Originally posted by chriso
Originally posted by LazyPyro
The Cloudwater DIPA V series beers can all be retired as we know that series has ended and won't be coming back.
Beers that are no longer in production should be retired one year after their latest release unless they are festival specials or the like, only available at a particular event, in which case they may be retired immediately.
Ah yeah sorry I forgot about that, I remember now I asked about the rules of retiring beers some months ago and think you're the one who answered me back then... woops. Well, under this rule v6, 7 and 8 are over a year old so could be retired if an admin sees fit. Otherwise just leave until next year when the entire series will be of retirement age. |
Originally posted by LazyPyro
Regarding the BrewDog beers, for what it's worth BrewDog themselves said all the collabfest beers should be added under the brewery in charge of the collab, with BrewDog added as a collaborator, even though it was local bars that were collaborating and not the actual BrewDog brewing team.
I believe we had a reason for concluding that the participating Brewdog bar should be included in the beer name. I have quite forgotten what it was.
Again, the method for dealing with collaborations is far from perfect so it's not something I'd lose sleep over. |
|
|
|
|
Originally posted by LazyPyro
Some more minor housekeeping. The Cloudwater DIPA V series beers can all be retired as we know that series has ended and won't be coming back. 1-5 are already done but 6-13 are still active. https://www.ratebeer.com/Ratings/Beer/ShowBrewerBeers.asp?BrewerID=22393
Re: NMBC... the Patrons Project stuff needs more of a cleanup than I thought. I just went through every single one of the beers - 3 of them need names editing (they included photographers/artists as part of the name which I don't think we should be putting there), while a whopping 17 of them have no commercial description (or need it updating to a proper one). Normally I wouldn't place so much importance on descriptions but I think these beers are all worthy of having one given their collaborative nature with members of the creative community there, the non-brewing people involved deserve some recognition for their input.
Not all but I think most of the beers are posted about on NMBC's blog and/or Facebook page. Some will require paraphrasing and/or cutting and pasting to get a more concise description but for the most part all the info we need is there. I'm happy to go through some of these later today. I suspect posting that many descriptions on the forums for one of you to copy paste in is going to hit the character limit so I'll probably put it all in a text file and post the link here for one of you to go through when you have the time.
In the meantime, here are the 3 which you may want to name edit (I don't necessarily disagree with including their names, but all the other beers in this project don't include artist/photographer names in the title, instead mentioning their work in the description, so I suggest this for consistency reasons)
1. https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/northern-monk-james-butler-marble-patrons-project-303-black-hole-sun/528444/
Remove "James Butler" - tattoo artist who designed the label
2. https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/northern-monk-nomad-clan-patrons-projects-202-peanut-butter-and-jelly-brown/460630/
Remove "Nomad Clan" - they are street muralists who designed the label
3. https://www.ratebeer.com/beer/northern-monk-striding-edge-patrons-projects-501-light-ipa/494489/
This one is genuinely misnamed. Striding Edge is the name of the beer, not a collaborator. The collaborator is actually Ricky Lightfoot (a fell runner), whose name will be included in the description once I post it here later for adding.
Correct name: Northern Monk Patrons Projects 5.01 Striding Edge Light IPA
Northern Monk beers renamed. |
|
|
