Talk:Hunter Valley wine

Introduction

The lead section is supposed to summarise the article. The second paragraph is almost all about semillon; in fact it's only 20 words shorter than the actual semillon section, which constitutes only 3.5% of the article, but is represented by 41% of the lead. The semillon section, by the way, seems to finish in the middle of a sentence. The lede needs to be re-written appropriately and the semillon section needs to be completed. The remainder of the article is somewhat "flowery" at times and parts need to be rewritten with a more encyclopaedic tone. Additionally, rainfall and temperature information needs to be confirmed. There are a few figures that don't match Bureau of Meteorology figures. --AussieLegend (talk) 10:05, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Images

Whether or not it's the norm in wine articles is not an issue. Doing something incorrectly somewhere else is not an excuse for making it a standard. Images should be tagged correctly as per MOS:IMAGES and WP:IMGSIZE. Tall images should use the "upright" tag and left aligned images shouldn't be placed immediately after headings as it breaks text flow and distracts the reader. That definitely does not look good in an encyclopaedia. With this article, as in so many others (unfortunately) there are far too many headings to comfortably place images on the left, which is why we right-align them, which is the default. Left aligned images are obviously allowed but when you can't place them without affecting the readability of an article, they should go to the right or they should be left out. It's not necessary to have images for everything, they should enhance the readers understanding and huge, left aligned images after headings definitely don't do that. -AussieLegend (talk) 01:39, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

It is your personal opinion that Left-Right staggering doesn't look good and affect readability while others obviously think differently. In fact, seeing a wall of left-aligned text with images all pushed over to the right looks dull and off balance while the L-R staggering offers counterbalance between text and image and, in fact, can improve readability by looking like an actual book or magazine article versus someone's book report.

But again, MOS:IMAGES doesn't prohibit the practice and in facts points to the article Timpani as an example of how this practice is commonly done on the encyclopedia. This is purely a stylistic choice that is not prohibited by any Wikipedia policy and therefore it makes the most sense to go with the style that is common with wine articles. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 02:02, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

ADD I will not edit war with you but I do have to say I find your preoccupation and WP:OWN-ish behavior to this article quite bizarre. As I noted, there is no policy against L-R image staggering and you are merely imposing your personal will and style preference here. As this does seem to be the only wine article on your watchlist, I recommend if you want to further impose your personal will and style preference on all the other wine articles that you create the page Wikipedia:WikiProject Wine/AussieLegend's rules on how things should be done since obviously just going on Wikipedia policies and guidelines is not enough. But please hurry with that page since the Wine Project is going to be working extensively on Australian wine articles as part of an upcoming article creation/improvement drive and I hate to see content editors stepping on your toes by creating articles not up to your personal standards. Agne^Cheese/^Wine 02:16, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I haven't said anything against L-R staggering. What I said, and what is in the MoS somewhere, is that left-aligned images immediately after headings break text-flow and distracts the reader. L-R staggering, when carried out properly, can improve an article considerably. I even suggested that moving to the left in the article is fine as long as they aren't after headings,[1] so how you've come up with the idea that I'm totally against L-R staggering is puzzling. Accusing somebody of "WP:OWN-ish behavior" simply because they don't agree with you is, at best, uncivil. As for my "preoccupation" with the article, I actually live in the region and have most Hunter Region articles on my watchlist, which is how I noticed your edits. It appears that in doing so, I have stepped on your toes by questioning Agne27's rules on how things should be done. --AussieLegend (talk) 04:25, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I haven't said anything against L-R staggering. Yet you revert my attempts to put the article back to the L-R staggering that is common in wine articles (and expressively allowed according to MOS:IMAGES). Does this mean that you would not revert me again if I put the images back? If it is just the exact location of the left images that is the issue, would I be free of the threat of another reversion if I switch up the order on which image is left and which is right in the stagger? Seriously, which way is up and if I can't just edit according the guidelines and the way that every other wine article is edited? If you're okay with a L-R stagger may I ask that you order the pictures in the L-R stagger in a way that pleases you? Agne^Cheese/^Wine 05:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I reverted this edit for the reasons explained in the very first paragraph of this discussion. The edit removed the "upright" tag from File:Lieutenant Shortland.jpg making it unnecessarily large. (Tall images should use the "upright" tag.) The remaining images, with the exception of File:Drought conditions in the Upper Hunter near Singleton.jpg broke text flow by being placed directly after headings. File:Drought conditions in the Upper Hunter near Singleton.jpg came really close and, in any case, it doesn't aid the reader by placing it on the left. It's a distracting image and really, of little encyclopaedic value because it's pretty much a generic image of the Hunter Valley. In fact, it's somewhat misleading because it doesn't show drought conditions in the region at all. The original caption for this image is merely "The most cattle I saw grazing in one place all day".[2] It's fairly typical for most of the area during most of the year, regardless of rainfall. The tall grasses on the road side of the fence are indicative of reasonable rainfall in preceding weeks. As I explained in the opening of this discussion, the length of the paragraphs effectively prevents most images from being left aligned without breaking text flow. The only images that can really be left aligned at 1024x768 or less are File:Hunter Valley and Sydney proximity.jpg, File:Drought conditions in the Upper Hunter near Singleton.jpg and File:Hunter Shiraz grapes.jpg. Once we get to 1280x1024, File:Hunter Shiraz grapes.jpg has to be right aligned. At 1440x900, which is pretty much the standard these days, there are only two images that can be left aligned without breaking text flow. Remember, we have to cater for resolutions used by as many readers as possible, not just the resolution you're using now. A few times now, including in edit summaries, you've referred to "the way it's done in other wine articles". If staggering without regard to the resolution is common in wine articles then it should be fixed. This is an encyclopaedia, not a wine catalogue or brochure. --AussieLegend (talk) 06:50, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Merge or split

There is a unanimous consensus to merge the three subregions (Pokolbin, Broke Fordwich, Upper Hunter Valley) to Hunter Valley wine. Cunard (talk) 04:02, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Should the information on the Hunter Valley wine zone, Hunter wine region, and the three subregions (Pokolbin, Broke Fordwich, Upper Hunter Valley) be upmerged into one article (presumably this one), or split out to expand three or four other articles, with this one serving as a WP:SUMMARY? I recently created the three subregion articles as part of an effort to provide separate articles for every wine region in New South Wales. This article already contains some complementary information that could be moved down to those articles, or the info there could be moved up to this one, with section redirects. --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:54, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

• Merge - There is not enough content in Pokolbin, Broke Fordwich or Upper Hunter Valley to justify separate articles at this time although, ideally, there will be enough in the future. Until that time they should all live here where, hopefully, expanding one section will aid in expanding the other two. The regions are so close to each other that much of the information available is common to all three regions. Two and a half of the three regions can be seen in the image to the right. All three articles are about wine regions, and the names of these articles can be misleading, as there are populated places with the same names - in fact these wine regions are based around the populated places so, at the very least they should be named "<Foo> wine region" to differentiate between the populated place and the wine region. --AussieLegend (✉) 14:25, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
• Merge. These three subregion articles would make nice subsections in a larger article about the greater region. And that larger article will still be rather small on its own. If in the future any of the subsections grow to a size warranting a split (and there's no requirement for all of them to do that), then that section could be split off into its own article with a summary and {{main}} link pointing to the parent article. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:57, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
• Merge. Cowdy001 (talk) 07:54, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
• Merge for the reasons stated above. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 06:14, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
• Merge per Amatulić. I came here because I was invited by RfC bot. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:02, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
• Merge as above. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 19:41, 2 July 2016 (UTC), via Feedback request service

The bot removed the RFC header, so I have merged the three subregion articles to this one, as that is clearly the community response to my question. Thank you all for your guidance. --Scott Davis ^Talk 14:41, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.