Gray Monk: 25th Anniversay dups

CellarTracker Main Site

Gray Monk: 25th Anniversay dups

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Cellar Talk] >> Wine Data Errors & Corrections >> Gray Monk: 25th Anniversay dups

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Gray Monk: 25th Anniversay dups - 11/29/2008 9:22:38 AM

fries

Posts: 65
Joined: 10/4/2008
Status: offline

Gray Monk Estate Winery in BC celebrated their 25th anniversary in 2007 with commemorative labels on all wines released that year.... unfortunately this has resulted in a bunch of CT dups. These wines are no different than any other vintage year, so I'm going to enter edit requests to merge them with their non-anniversary year counter parts.

Chardonnay 25th Anniversary --> Chardonnay Unwooded
Pinot Auxerrois Twenty Fifth Anniversary --> Pinot Auxerrois
Pinot Blanc Twenty Fifth Anniversary --> Pinot Blanc
Pinot Noir Odyssey 25th Anniversary --> Pinot Noir Odyssey
Pinot Noir Twenty Fifth Anniversary --> Pinot Noir

There are a number of other small errors (incorrect appellation, no designation for blends) that I've also entered requests for.

For recent vintages, GM has started adding vineyard names to some of their labels. There is still only one of each varietal / designation combo (eg 1 2005 Pinot Noir, 1 2005 Pinot Noir Odyssey) released each year, so we could conceivably remove the vineyard name to maintain the vintage vertical for each distinct wine.

It would be nice if there were two different ways to enter designation / vineyard info in CT... one that created a totally new wine record, and one that just "tagged" a particular vintage of an existing record with some additional info (eg 25th Anniversary, Vineyard), thereby maintaining the vintage vertical for that particular wine. I suppose the the wiki functionality allows this to some degree...

Cheers,

Francis

Post #: 1

RE: Gray Monk: 25th Anniversay dups - 11/29/2008 10:19:40 AM

Eric

Posts: 5740
Joined: 10/10/2003
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline

Yes, the Wiki is the best place to annotate these sorts of details...

_____________________________

Cheers!
-Eric LeVine

(in reply to fries)

Post #: 2

RE: Gray Monk: 25th Anniversay dups - 11/29/2008 10:29:13 AM

fries

Posts: 65
Joined: 10/4/2008
Status: offline

Thanks for the quick reply. So, it seems like best practice for the use of the "designation" and "vineyard" field is to allow the creation of distinct wines that have a designation or vineyard that doesn't vary over time. For wines such as those from GM, where there is one wine of each type in each vintage, there should be a single wine record, and things that vary on the label year to year (25th Anniversary, vineyard for a particular vintage) can be noted in the Wiki.

Cheers,

Francis

(in reply to Eric)

Post #: 3

RE: Gray Monk: 25th Anniversay dups - 11/29/2008 10:35:42 AM

Eric

Posts: 5740
Joined: 10/10/2003
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline

It sort of depends. The Designation and Vineyard fields are meant to honor the front label of the wine. However, in some cases we will add or omit info in order to maintain vintage continuity if there is true continuity in the underlying wine. For example:

The Chateauneuf-du-Pape from Vieux-Telegraphe has always hailed from La Crau vineyard. However, the wine was not labeled this way until the 1990's. However, in order to maintain continuity with earlier vintages and because recent vintages are prominently labeled witjh La Crau, we make sure all vintages have this vineyard set.
The anniversary case you you mentioned is a good one. Lots and lots of producers will decorate a specific vintage of a wine with a mention of an anniversary. In some cases this is a special, anniversary specific cuvee. Usually it just commemorates a given vintage and is no different in sourcing than prior vintages. In this case it makes sense to omit the anniversary.

So those are two judgment calls that I feel are easy to defend.

In the case you cite above, if the vineyard sources really are changing year over year, while error prone I would be more inclined to try and maintain different wine definitions.

_____________________________

Cheers!
-Eric LeVine

(in reply to fries)

Post #: 4

RE: Gray Monk: 25th Anniversay dups - 11/29/2008 11:00:17 AM

fries

Posts: 65
Joined: 10/4/2008
Status: offline

In the case of GM, I don't think that vineyard actually changes... I think they've just jumped onto the vineyard labeling bandwagon as of late. The only two vineyards that I've seen are "Gray Monk Vineyard" (in Kelowna) for Seigrebbe and Pinot Gris, and "Dry Creek Estate" (in Oliver) for Merlot. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be consistent... because I know for sure that grapes for the Pinot Gris Odyssey come form the "Gray Monk Vineyard", but it's never been labeled as such.

I guess at the end of the day, the problem here is that because CT is open community, there sill always be differing interpretations of labels (and sometimes not enough attention paid to detail), so some of the dups can never really be cleared up. [at this point, Eric thinks to be himself, "Welcome to my world..."]

Cheers,

Francis

(in reply to Eric)

Post #: 5

RE: Gray Monk: 25th Anniversay dups - 11/29/2008 11:08:46 AM

Eric

Posts: 5740
Joined: 10/10/2003
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline

Got 'em. I also added the Brut to the Sparkling Designations to match the labels. Looks a lot cleaner now overall, thanks!

_____________________________

Cheers!
-Eric LeVine

(in reply to fries)

Post #: 6