Talk:List of microbreweries

Nominated for deletion

Afd: Nominated for deletion; see List of microbreweries — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aspro (talk • contribs) 21:15, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Article retained

The discussion was closed with a keep result. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:48, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of microbreweries. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111124152746/http://ucbjournal.com/news.php?id=107 to http://ucbjournal.com/news.php?id=107
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203065221/http://www.5280.com/magazine/2011/07/tapped-out to http://www.5280.com/magazine/2011/07/tapped-out
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://shopping.thestarphoenix.com/SS/Page.aspx?sstarg=&facing=false&secid=115734&artid=1734996
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110910073227/http://alextimes.com/news/2011/feb/15/port-city-brewing-arrives-on-the-craft-b/ to http://www.alextimes.com/news/2011/feb/15/port-city-brewing-arrives-on-the-craft-b/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:55, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Criteria for inclusion

It seems that the consensus at the two AfDs for this article is that only 'notable' craft/microbreweries should be included. Any thoughts on the criteria? With a nod to meeting WP:NORG. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:33, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Assuming it survives AFD, I agree that only notable entries should be listed. So per WP:LISTCOMPANY we would be saying that non-notable entries are explicity not allowed. user:Clarityfiend recently recently trimmed the list to only blue linked entries. Any entries without articles would need to have sufficient reliable sources to show that the entry would clearly qualify for a Wikipedia article if one were written (and that's a tough job for something like this where we don't have defined "presumed notability" criteria). Meters (talk) 05:48, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

An additional criterion for inclusion is the definition of "micro". Sometimes this term is used without discretion, and where it is more defined, it can still vary by country. The top of this page currently uses the US definition of 15,000 barrels per year, or 475,000 gallons. Breweries that produce more beer than that should not be included. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 05:53, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Of course. Seems reasonable to use one particular definition rather than differing national definitions I have no opinion of which country's definition we should use (no objection to the US number), just that if be sourced and listed as a criterion for list inclusion. Meters (talk) 18:16, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

On that I disagree. We should use national definitions IF available, and US until a national definition is found. It would be strange if a Korean or Polish microbrewery was to be held to US standards/definitions, and if they pass their own country's definitions but not the US one they should be included here. (This is a half-moot point and we are unlikely to find many such alternative definitions, but if they are found they should be respected just as the US one). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm happy to consider multiple definitions as long as we clearly define what we are doing and the definitions are sourced, but it seems a bit odd (and awkward) to include breweries of a certain size from countries that have a definition larger than the US's, but exclude breweries of the same size from countries that do not have a definition. Meters (talk) 04:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Chart?

While the alphabetical list is interesting, it would be more useful if the list could be presented in table format, where it could be sorted not only by brewery name, but by region, or by founder, or by year founded, year closed (if applicable); etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.43.253 (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2024 (UTC)