This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Scotch whisky article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days ![]() |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article is written in Scottish English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 1, 2004, June 1, 2005, June 1, 2006, June 1, 2013, and June 1, 2018. |
It implies that this is "the" Scotch and should probably not be used if an unmarked Glencairn, other tumbler, or nosing glass could be used. It looks bad anyway with its white background in the slightly darker box.
Some alternatives: [1], [2], [3], [4]
--79.202.110.26 (talk) 17:21, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
The paragraph on Labelling in the Wikipedia article on Scotch Whisky runs like so : A Scotch whisky label comprises several elements that indicate aspects of production, age, bottling, and ownership. Some of these elements are regulated by the SWR,[7] and some reflect tradition and marketing.[8] The spelling of the term "whisky" is often debated by journalists and consumers. Scottish, English, Welsh, Australian and Canadian whiskies use "whisky", Irish whiskies use "whiskey", while American and other styles vary in their spelling of the term.[9] The references are to MacLean 2010 (7 & 8)and Jackson 2010 (9) resp.
There have been many new entrants to the Whisky market this last decade. Nick Hines, in an article titled Why Is Whiskey Spelled Differently in Different Countries? makes a few interesting observations[1]:
Perhaps a couple of countries could be added to the list, though they are not covered by MacLean and Jackson. Moitraanak (talk) 19:11, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
References
References
Aqua vitae (‘water of life’ in Latin) was the generic term for concentrated aqueous solution of ethanol throughout the Roman Empire, widely used during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance and translated into many languages. In Gaelic, it was uisge beatha, in Irish uisce beatha. Whisky connoisseur Charles MacLean says that this was Anglicised from uiskie (c.1618) to whiskie (1715) to whisky (1746) [1]. F Paul Pacult, author of ‘A Double Scotch’, 2005, says that Aqua Vitae ultimately became whisky in 1736.[2]
The spelling Whiskey was equally common in those days. In fact, the Hansard of 1896 uses the term Whiskey.[3] The report of the Royal Commission on Whiskey and Other Potable Spirits (1908/09) spelt both Irish and Scotch with an ‘e’ throughout.[4] Interestingly, it was the Irish Association headed by the 'Big Four' of Irish Whiskey (John Jameson & Son, John Power & Son, George Roe & Co. and Willam Jameson & Co.) who argued-in vain- before the Commission that their spirit was better than that distilled in Scotland and that the correct spelling was 'Whisky', to differentiate it from the inferior Scottish and English 'Whiskey'. This argument had started in 1863, when blending of grain whisky with malt whisky in bond was permitted across the industry (1860 for licensed distillers/brewers). The Irish found it unsettling that such a bland and relatively tasteless product could even be called whisky/whiskey. In a bid to disbar spirit obtained from grains using Coffey or patent/column stills from the whisky regime, they launched a book, Truths about Whisky, in 1878, a diatribe against that spirit which they refused to call whisky/whiskey. The final decision of 2009, 31 years later, [5] went against the Irish, which gigantic industry, for numerous reasons was falling apart at the seams. By then, blended Scotch whisky had taken the world by storm. In a paradox of sorts, the waning Irish industry settled on whiskey, to differentiate their product from Scotch whisky.
Gavin Smith notes in his book A-Z of Whisky(3rd edition) [6]"The first use of Scotch with the sense of specifically relating to whisky occurs in 1855, 'while malt liquors give our Scotch and Irish whiskies,'” thus dating the origin of the term 'Scotch' as definitive of Scotch whisky.
At least 82 nations/nation states around the globe are trying their hand at making and selling whisky. Of these countries, all but four spell Aqua Vitae ‘whisky’. The term ‘whiskey’ is used in Ireland (since 1960), Mexico and Peru and for most, but not all, American brands.
Albania, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, Corsica, Croatia, Cuba, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, England, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Holland, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Israel, Ivory Coast, Japan, Latvia, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Scotland, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Tanzania, Tasmania, The Philippines, Uruguay, Vietnam, Wales, Zimbabwe, Zambia & possibly a couple more spell it Whisky. North Korea is a unique case-the label/carton is indecipherable, except for volume and strength which bear English numerals, leaving the choice of spelling of the spirit known as Samilpo whisky to the author of the moment. [7]
While such a predominance of whisky over whiskey makes a compelling argument that whisky should be the global spelling, it must be noted, however, that the spelling is by convention or tradition and not by law. [8] The Scottish version (Scotch) uses the term whisky.
Comments/additions etc. are welcome.Moitraanak (talk) 11:55, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
References
The talk page article was clearly marked TBC (...)For starters, a talk page is not an article, it is a place where we discuss what should and shouldn't go in an article and how to write it. Please check WP:TALK. If you're trying things out, do it in your sandbox, not in talk pages. Back to my comment, which you removed (and shouldn't have, per WP:TALKO): the article is about Scotch whisky, which is a specific type of whisky. You might want to contribute your piece about etymology and so on to the whisky article. BTW, your references are missing the (( )) symbols around the "cite" templates. I'm not sure if you did it on purpose or what. If what you're proposing is a new section about all this stuff, you should never just copy-paste it from a blog (is it your blog? it kind of looks like it is) and then make small changes and add references. Wikipedia isn't your blog. VdSV9•♫ 14:18, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Your input makes sense now. It is suited to the article on Whisky. I need to correct the ref format anon.Moitraanak (talk) 14:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Consider these lines (1) Between the 1760s and the 1830s a substantial unlicensed trade originated from the Highlands, forming a significant part of the region's export economy. In 1782, more than 1,000 illegal stills were seized in the Highlands: these can only have been a fraction of those in operation. This needs review. Gavin D. Smith, writing in the Whisky Magazine, Issue 19, says that there were more than 14,000 detections of illicit operations in 1823. [1]
(2) A farmer, George Smith, working under landlord the Duke of Gordon, was the first person in Scotland[19] to take out a licence for a distillery under the new Act, founding the Glenlivet Distillery in 1824, to make single malt Scotch. // This is correct, but there could be some emphasis on the fact that The Glenlivet was the first to open after the 1823 Act was published. The first legal distillery in Scotland, Ferintosh, accounted for two-thirds of the whisky produced in the country by the late 1760s. [2]
(3) Second, there was a shortage of wine, brandy, and cognac in France, significant by 1880, due to the phylloxera bug, a parasitic insect, destroying many of the wine vines. This is incomplete. They were actually struck by three tragic malaises that would cripple the wine industry, and its related brandy industry. The first blow was Odium in 1863, a fungus that causes powdery mildew on grapes and originated in North America. The disease was crippling, but not devastating; it would significantly reduce wine production. This mildew was being brought under control when, in 1868, the second wave of insect-borne lice struck the weakened industry. This was the Phylloxera epidemic, caused by an aphid, or the grape louse, which attacked and destroyed the roots of the domesticated grapevines in Europe. What followed was a catastrophe. In 1883, “Downy” mildew was the third tragedy to hit the European wine industry, which came while the French were still looking for a cure for Phylloxera. The industry recovered in about a lustrum thereafter. But the damage had been done.[3]
TBC
Moitraanak (talk) 13:56, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
The list of brands here is prone to WP:SPAMBAIT, as another brand was just added to the list. I think two or three examples is sufficient. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 17:34, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
References