Talk:Alcopop/Archive 1

Archive 1

removed

removed from article: "Remarkably, other sweet, alcoholic beverages that had been around for years escaped this madness."

What distinguishes alcopops from older beverages is the way they have been surreptitiously marketed toward teenagers. not that teen drinking is a new problem -- but in my day gin etc tasted so damn foul it took a really determined effort to get wasted ... ;-) -- Tarquin 12:38 Aug 20, 2002 (PDT)

alcopop v malternative

I'm not sure whether "alcopop" is cutsier than the US term "malternative," but the latter seems more self-consciously marketese. --Calieber 16:21, Oct 31, 2003 (UTC)

I'm from the US , and I've never heard the term "alcopop" or "malternative" ever in my life. I guess it's a GB thing, and frankly the article should reflect that. In my opinion, this article doesn't really warrant inclusion in the Alcoholic Beverage template as it is a limited regional word. Secondly, it sounds like something MADD would make up while screaming about the children confused by this horrible evil.130.13.20.67 (talk) 22:01, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

random links

Do we really need all of the random links to unrelated pages, such as Sweet, Bottles, Germany, United Kingdom? I thinks these links are overkill. Just because it can be linked to, doesn't mean it should. --Andy-106 14:34, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

chick drink

Chick Drink is used in the U.S. as well (at least in New England)

German Excise Tax

The tax Germany has put on coolers seems more aimed at protecting thier beer industry than discouraging underage drinking.

Can the tax possibly be 0.80 or 0.90 euros per bottle? Beer costs on average 0.70 to 0.80 euros per half-liter bottle. I don't believe the alcopops cost much more than a euro per bottle. Without a citation, this tax figure seems suspect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.64.92.82 (talk) 19:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Zima

You know, I remember Hooch (I think you can still get it) and Two Dogs, but I can't honestly recall ever hearing of a drink called "Zima"! Gin Zing, now that stuff was nice. Like ginger beer :) IainP [[User_talk:IainP|(talk)]] 12:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC) (sorry about dodgy signature... apparently it's a system problem)

Zima is very much a U.S. phenomenon. Until a few years ago they were advertising the hell out of that swill. I see it in any alcohol-selling establishment. You can call me Al 21:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

It's something that struck me about this article; I see "alcopop" (the term, as such) as pretty much a UK phenomenon. After all the U.S. has had Boone's Farm since at least the 1970s and never mentioned the genre as a fad. I wonder if any U.S.-only drinks even qualify for this article. Themadchopper 05:41, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Anti-alcohol groups in the US, such as The Center for Science in the Public Interest, also use the term "alcopops." See, for example, Alcopops, Calories & Weight Gain.David Justin 00:46, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Alcopop

Where is the name Alcopop used? It's not a common term in Australia. Ozdaren 04:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Certainly in the UK. Nunquam Dormio 20:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

It's a common term in Ireland also. Everytime 03:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

In the United States, "alcopop" is a term of derision used by anti-alcohol activists. The industry does not use that term because it conflates the ideas of "alcoholic beverage" and "soda pop" in a potentially confusing way which may make those products more appealing to under-age youth. By popularizing the term, anti-alcohol activists accomplish what they falsely accuse the beverage alcohol industry of doing. I would argue that the very use of the term is in violation of Wikipedia neutrality policies, as it is a prejudicial, politically-loaded term.Cowdery (talk) 01:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I think this should be removed from the article. The phrase "anti-alcohol activists accomplish what they falsely accuse the beverage alcohol industry of doing." can hardly be called neutral IMHO Kevertje (talk) 19:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough on the second sentence, but the article should make clear that this is not an industry term, hence the vagueness of its definition, and the fact that the type of beverage being described varies significantly by country. It is used primarily by anti-alcohol activists and occasionally by neutral commentators. The fact that some jurisdictions, including my state of Illinois in the United States, have used it in legislation means that it has as least some official standing. This entry could do a lot better job. It should perhaps be noted that, in the United States, at least, this term is almost never used by the consumers of the product. No one walks into a bar and asks, "what alcopops do you have?" Cowdery (talk) 21:59, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

It's definitely not a term widely used anywhere outside Europe. For this reason perhaps the first lines should reflect this. In Australia its industry term is "pre-mixed".Wampusaust 05:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The article really needs to be split into separate sections covering usage in North America, the UK / Ireland and Australia / NZ. The US beer based drinks are unique to that region and only exist because of the bizarre US post-prohibition liquor laws. Elsewhere alcopops are universally made with industrial ethanol because that's the cheapest way tho make them. The list of brands is pointless and misleading because they mean different things in different markets. --80.176.142.11 (talk) 20:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The above paragraph is true, though I would add that spirits-based ready-to-drink products also exist in the United States but because of the regulatory pecularities, their footprint in the marketplace is tiny compared to flavored malt beverages. I think this whole entry should be changed to reflect the fact that alcopop is a vague and deliberately prejudicial term that can refer to a wide range of very different beverages. Cowdery (talk) 01:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps this should just be a disambiguation page.Cowdery (talk) 08:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Generally these drinks are colloquially referred to as 'coolers' in Western Canada. I've never heard any term at all used in marketing materials. I've certainly never heard the term Alcopop. I agree with the above posters, the introduction to this article needs to reflect that this is UK- or euro-centric. Adding links to dag pages for other common terms is probably useful too.

The term only started being used in Australia when they bought in the new taxes. I believe it was used to make the law seem "fresh" as it is aimed at young people. For some reason the term "Pre-mixed drinks" doesn't have good ring to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.127.145 (talk) 10:58, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

'Alcopop' is certianly commonly used by the Australian news media these days. Format (talk) 07:21, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Chart

what's the deal with the chart? it doesnt make any sense to my little mind. Skhatri2005 07:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I should fix it up, have headings and what not. Though I would imagine it is pretty obvious exactly what it means... 202.10.86.59 14:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

sorry to be a bother, but what's the point of the chart. it's a good concept but I dont know how complete it is. first you have a large list of malternatives, then theres this chart that has only some of them on it. i'm just wondering the need for it, that's all. no bad faith here. cheersSkhatri2005 09:08, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Absolutly none taken at all. And you are right, it is not very complete. I have slowly been filling it out, but I have not even heard of some of the drinks mentioned. I don't want to add drinks and not have any information on thim. IF the general concensus is that the diagram shall go, the diagram shall go 202.10.86.59 07:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The chart is overkill. A list of products would be sufficient, with notations for ones that are especially unusual or significant. Thetrick 20:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Premium Packaged Spirits

The PPS article definately should be merged with this one if it is nothing more than a different marketing term for the range of products. Thetrick 20:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Woody's?

Anyone got anything on "Woody's"? Wasn't that the drink that started off the alcopop craze in the UK and Ireland?

History

These drinks have been around in Australia since the 1970s, first manufactured as UDL (United Distillers Ltd) and are collectively known as RTDs (Ready To Drink). The term alcopop is a British word. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phanto282 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

As noted elsewhere, in the United States these products are flavored malt beverages, whose prototype is Zima, but the phenomenon can also be traced to a Miller product called "clear beer," (brand name Miller Clear) which was produced and test marketed in 1993.Cowdery (talk) 01:21, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

So what's your point? The "phenomenon" (hardly rocket surgery to put a spirit with a soft drink) has been around since the 1970s in Australia. They have nothing to do with flavoured malt beverages or beer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.191.166 (talk) 13:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

"late 1980s" does not seem right. We were drinking flavored malt liquor that came in 4 packs in California back in the early 1970's. They came in small bottles packaged in 4 packs and had cute names and various sweet flavors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.2.221.134 (talk) 10:37, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

CONFLICTING

"California's state assembly recently passed AB 346, a bill which requires manufacturers of alcopops to carry a 'warning' label stating "ATTENTION: THIS DRINK CONTAINS ALCOHOL." [8] This bill has been praised by groups advocating against consumption of alcohol by minors[9], since these drinks are favored by young people due to their flavor and alcohol content."

I don't know... these two sentances don't seem to fit. Minors like the drink for its flavour and alcohol content, and the warning label states that it contains alcohol. It's almost additional advertising. You could almost replace "since" with "dispite the fact" and it would be just as correct. I just believe some minor clarification is required here. Do we really need to state here why the drinks are enjoyed by minors? 202.10.86.59 (talk) 15:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

That second phrase confused me also. "Since these drinks are favored by young people" seems to be neither neutral nor sourced, given that sources 8 and 9 a couple sections back apparently state they're not marketed towards a younger crowd, they're too sweet to drink very many, and most importantly, older people drink them more. I'm going to add a citation needed to that phrase, for the reasons I stated here. 74.181.90.193 (talk) 02:07, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

List of Alcopops has incorrect entries

Am I misunderstanding the definition of Alcopop or are some of the things in the list of examples wrong?

Skyy Vodka is just a hard liquor, isn't it?

And doesn't it have to be sold pre-mixed to count? Or do those whiskeys and cokes and the gin and tonic count too? Is there any distinction between "Alcopop" and simply "Cocktail"? Mbarbier (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

In the United States, alcopop is a term primarily used by neo-prohibitionists to refer to sweet, fruity, flavored malt beverages, which they believe are masquerading as soft drinks to entice underage drinkers. Their target most recently is alcoholic energy drinks such as Sparks and Tilt, which they also consider alcopops. The term appears in statutes on the books in Illinois and other states so defined, but some commentators lump in sprits-based pre-mixed cocktails too, but they are not alcopops according to the statutory definition, and are not very significant in the marketplace. In the United States, products such as Smirnoff Ice and Jack Daniel's Black Jack Cola are flavored malt beverages and contain no vodka nor whiskey.Cowdery (talk)

Category merge

Now that the Alcopop and PPS articles have been merged, I suggest that Category:Alcopop and Category:Premixed and RTD alcoholic beverages be merged. I have no preference as to which survives, though retaining Alcopop would make more sense. --Thetrick (talk) 23:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Other names

Locally this is known as "bitchbeer", but I'm not sure how to include that in the article. Anyone? - 38.100.218.55 (talk) 05:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you. We all call it bitch beer here in Texas. 74.196.43.27 (talk) 06:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Prominence of term origin

The term is only used by people and organisations that want to ban or restrict them, why should that not be prominent? It's not biased; it's fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.50.4.4 (talk) 18:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

That statement is demonstrably untrue; "alcopop" is used all the time by news organizations not known to be infiltrated by temperance advocates (385 on Google News in the last month alone,) the second Google hit for "alcopop" is "a celebration of the success of these sugary alcoholic drinks, from the viewpoint not of the big breweries but of a delighted consumer," etc. It is true that the alcohol industry regards "alcopop" as a problematic, pejorative term, and it may even be true that the prevalence of the term in the mainstream is a result of effective propaganda by anti-alcohol crusaders. However, it is not for Wikipedia to say whether a given term is appropriate or inappropriate, just to report on the opinions of others. The previous structure of the article, to which you have reverted, is clearly designed to favour a position of "don't call them alcopops, alcopops is a bad word, the nasty temperance people are behind it." This is clearly not neutral presentation of fact and it borders on original synthesis in that it ties together various sources to introduce an "alcopop = bad word" narrative that appears not to be supported directly by the individual sources. <eleland/talkedits> 00:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

No that statement is NOT untrue. In the article itself I wrote "and the media that report them" so your contention of its use in media is specious. The term was derived by "anti-alcohol crusaders" as you called them and should be defined as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.50.4.4 (talk) 18:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay so it was in my explanation for the inclusion, not the article, that I wrote of the media, but it's still a specious arguement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.50.4.4 (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Whiskeys

Why are whiskeys on the table? Whiskeys are not alcopops, and they're a traditional hard drink... Jack Daniels is not a malternative. 76.66.195.63 (talk) 08:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Jack Daniels is indeed, not a malternative. However, this page deals with alcopops, which is a superset of malternatices. Jack Daniels do release an RTD drink called Jack Daniels and X, where X is coke, dry and lemonaide. In contexts where RTDs are common, "6 JD cans" would almost always mean "6 cans of Jack Daniels and coke". The chart has a "base" column which deals with the hard liquor used to make the RTD (sometimes of the same name). If this could be made clearer in the article, feel free to fix it. 203.122.97.43 (talk) 07:19, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand what you just typed, even less than what is written in the article about it. 74.196.43.27 (talk) 06:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Nothing in the Base column of the table is an alcopop. What makes it part of the table is that combining it with mixers makes an alcopop. Gregory.currie (talk) 17:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Garage brand visual removal request

On the link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcopop

a visual of a product Garage is shown: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Garage_Hard_Lemonade.jpg

On behalf of Carlsberg Breweries A/S, owner of the garage brand as shown, I request the removal of the image and reference to teh brand on the entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcopop.

Please confirm the removal.

Niels Lund-Johansen Director, Head of IP Carlsberg Breweries A/S Ny Carlsberg Vej 100 1799 Copenhagen, Denmark [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by NielsLJ (talk • contribs) 16:16, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

POV Page name

Alcopop is a perjorative term used by anti-alcohol activists, as acknowledged in the article's lead. This article should be moved to a neutral title, any suggestions? Skrelk (talk) 15:51, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Definitely. I have never heard the term "alcopop" used by anyone except anti-alcohol groups. It's never used to describe these types of beverages except in that context. Most people call them "wine coolers," even though many of them are malt-based. Cooler or wine cooler is NPOV, but alcopop is not. 71.71.57.15 (talk) 08:01, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

If the article's written in British English, Alcopop is probably the correct name - it's the common name in the UK. The industry seems to use RTD but that probably fails Wikipedia:Article titles#Use commonly recognizable names. Wine cooler means what is described in Wine accessory#Wine coolers (although Wine cooler is a separate article about the wine-based drinks). Peter James (talk) 00:08, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

In Germany they introduced "Alcopop" as a label for spirit coolers although "pop" as a label for soft drinks is completely unknown in Germany. Sounds funny ... but true :-} a×p_de^Hello! 23:34, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

The move to 'Cooler' reflects the WP 'all the world's America' mindset yet again. Nobody outside the US uses this term or knows what it means. The US drinks market is unique because of the distortions introduced by post-Prohibition liquor laws and applying US terminology to this subject is very unhelpful. I note there was no discussion prior to the move. --Ef80 (talk) 00:09, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

"Cooler" doesn't seem exactly NPOV either, actually. My impression is that it is probably a term selected by the beverage industry to encourage consumption. Do these beverages really cool anyone? Are they intended to help people look cool or feel cool? Where did that term come from? Is it commonly used outside the U.S.? —BarrelProof (talk) 18:00, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Certainly 'cooler' isn't used in the UK, where the generic name is 'alcopop'. This is mildly derogatory but not associated with any particular pressure group. The industry mostly calls them 'PMDs', premixed drinks, or 'PMCs', premixed cocktails, since they are basically premixed versions of old female oriented standard pub drinks like vodka and lemonade or rum and coke (the Australians used to refer to these as 'leg openers'). Consumers normally refer to them as specific brands, e.g. 'WKD blue please mate'. These drinks have little in common with American malt brewed products apart from the branding, which can seem perverse to anybody with a different alcohol regulation history. 'Smirnoff Ice' without any Smirnoff in it? Bizarre. --Ef80 (talk) 18:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I would think that the term "premixed drink" or "premixed cocktail" may be a somewhat broader category of drinks that includes those that aren't particularly low in alcohol content. For example, a can of Jack and Coke (like this one) would be a premixed drink, but it has an alcohol content above the given example range of 3–7% ABV. Would a Jack and Coke be considered an "alcopop"? (Perhaps so, since several Bourbon & Coke drinks, including that Jack Daniel's one specifically, are included in the Comparison of alcopops.) Perhaps some broadening of the content of the article would also be OK (and 10% alcohol content is not especially high either). —BarrelProof (talk) 15:50, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Jack Daniels mixed with coke is a very popular pub and bar drink in Britain. I don't think the premixed version is marketed here, and 10% ABV is certainly strong for an alcopop, but my guess would be that the popular media would still refer to it as such. Most alcopops are 4-5% ABV, but there are no legal reasons why stronger ones shouldn't be sold (though there may be adverse publicity). --Ef80 (talk) 14:15, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Re "I don't think the premixed version is marketed here" – I actually sat just across from a fellow who was openly drinking a can of that exact beverage on the Piccadilly Line just last week (or maybe it was the District line, but you get the point – I think we were on the segment between Ealing Common and South Kensington where both lines operate). It appears that the ABV level is not necessarily the same in all markets – Here are some photos of the product showing that it's sometimes only 7% or 8% ABV (along with a picture of a UK-specific variant that's only 5.5% ABV) and here is another photo showing only 6% ABV. I didn't notice what that particular fellow's can's label said about ABV, but it was definitely a Jack & Cola label. Apparently more than a million cases per year of JD brand whiskey are sold in the UK per year. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:03, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Maybe the premix is a London thing in the UK - I've not seen it out here in the sticks in Oxford (though I'm probably not part of the target demographic). JD has certainly been very successfully marketed over the last decade - I heard a news report recently that it was outselling the leading Scotch brand in terms of off sales (The Famous Grouse) in Britain. --Ef80 (talk) 20:24, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Contradiction between articles

Note that the wine cooler article says that wine coolers are not considered alcopops, since they are not spirits based, whereas this article seems to conflate all alcoholic beverages with relatively low alcohol content that contain fruit juice or flavourings as being "alcopops". Which is more correct? —BarrelProof (talk) 18:14, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 25 July 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to move back to "Alcopop" for the time being (non-admin closure) — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 20:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

---

Cooler (alcoholic beverage) → Premixed drink – There has been long-running discussion on the Talk page about what the name of this article should be. Last month someone moved it from "Alcopop" to "Cooler (alcoholic beverage)", asserting that there was a consensus to avoid "alcopop" – but there was no formal RM involved, and the result has not really been satisfactory. There have been simmering objections to "Alcopop" as pejorative and not universal. However, the "cooler" term seems to be U.S.-centric and not necessarily applicable to all of these products even within the U.S. Let's have a proper discussion and settle it. To me, "premixed drink" (which was suggested a couple of days ago) seems straightforward and reasonably descriptive for this (somewhat vague) category of alcoholic beverages. —BarrelProof (talk) 17:17, 25 July 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. — Sam Sailor ^Talk! 18:04, 7 August 2016 (UTC))

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with * '''Support''' or * '''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Comment: Unfortunately this is one of those WP:ENGVAR subjects where somebody is likely to object whatever decision is made (see archived discussions of eggplant and rutabaga). "Premixed drink" may be the best compromise, but doesn't that exclude US brewed malt alcopops? Also, although neutral and technically correct, I don't think it's a commonly used term anywhere. Good luck with this anyway. --Ef80 (talk) 14:29, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Note the sub-topic comparison of alcopops article. —  AjaxSmack  00:22, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Comment: After thinking a bit more about this, I think the best solution would be to revert to "alcopop", as this is the only term which describes this extremely varied range of drinks internationally. The lede should be rewritten to give a less US centric perspective, but equally it should be made clear early on that the term is problematic in the US because of its use by anti alcohol lobbyists. I can well imagine that there would be controversy in the US about alcopops themselves, as they are undeniably marketed to young drinkers and the US has an unusually high minimum age for alcohol purchase. --Ef80 (talk) 18:41, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

• Strong move back to alcopop - this is the long term stable name, and should have been kept. It is the only term used for drinks of this nature in the UK and is not at all pejorative in that locality. If there is a difference in usage worldwide, then it should still miaintain the original British English name per WP:RETAIN.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:30, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
• Support, and would accept the present name as a second choice, but "alcopop" is out of the question, being a very recent neologism, and of a more limited scope (even "cooler" is probably of too-limited scope; Club brand, for example, has a wide range of pre-mixed drinks that are not coolers, but hard-liquor with mixers, intended to simulate what would we get from a bartender, e.g. a Manhattan or a dry martini). The topic "premixed drink" is a perfectly WP:PRECISE and WP:RECOGNIZABLE term, in the form of a WP:DESCRIPTDIS name. Because it does not need parethetic disambiguation is it more WP:CONCISE than "cooler (alcoholic beverage)" and it does not suffer the WP:RECOGNIZABILITY and WP:NEO problems of "alcopop".  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  11:03, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted - please add new comments below this notice. — Sam Sailor ^Talk! 18:04, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

• Comment: We are in this position because of subject creep. The article was created back in 2002 by a British editor to describe the drinks introduced into the UK market in the early 90s. These are alcopops. The article was later modified and extended to cover drinks which are only marginally related to UK alcopops, such as US flavoured beer products and wine coolers. Later still US neoprohibitionist lobbyists such as MADD started to use alcopop in a highly derogatory sense in that country. We now have a confused mess where no title is universally acceptable or appropriate. --Ef80 (talk) 14:27, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose – Subject creep is a bit of an issue indeed, however we can't just invent names used nowhere because there's a controversy about real-world names used everywhere. Our choices among commonly-used names are "Alcopop" or "Cooler". "Cooler" needs a long "(alcoholic beverage)" disambiguator so it fails WP:CONCISE. Looking at the other titling WP:CRITERIA, we have roughly equal precision, recognizability and naturalness for both terms; consistency can't be invoked, for lack of similar articles leans slightly towards "Alcopop" due to Comparison of alcopops. We should also consider that the longstanding "Alcopop" title was unilaterally changed to "Cooler", a move which could have been reverted on-sight per policy, so the burden of getting consensus for a name change should lie on proponents of "Cooler". For all these reasons I feel that the most reasonable action is to move back to Alcopop. — JFG ^talk 02:01, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose - On balance, I support a move back to "Alcopop" as the best of a number of poor options, for the reasons stated above. "Premixed drink" would be the second choice if American editors continue to insist that Alcopop is unacceptable. I strongly oppose the retention of "Cooler". Really, an article split would be the only outcome satisfactory to everyone. --Ef80 (talk) 21:15, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

• Support alternative move back to alcopop, both as a reversal of an undiscussed move and as a first step towards an overall solution. Long or even medium term, we should have three or more articles, a very general one at premixed drink (including ones not yet covered by the article), a very specific one at wine cooler which already exists, and one at alcopop dealing with things called that anywhere in the world, linking to the others, and containing a section on more general coolers, and this last article is the one that should have this article's history. Andrewa (talk) 09:08, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alcopop. 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/20040102205450/http://www.portman-group.org.uk:80/ to http://www.portman-group.org.uk

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 22:29, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Alcopop. 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/20081205091420/http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=51&GA=95&DocTypeId=SB&DocNum=1625&GAID=9&LegID=29771&SpecSess=&Session= to http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=51&GA=95&DocTypeId=SB&DocNum=1625&GAID=9&LegID=29771&SpecSess=&Session=
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090418161735/http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C27574%2C25337669-421%2C00.html to http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C27574%2C25337669-421%2C00.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.portman-group.org.uk/

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) 07:59, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Merge Hard seltzer into this article.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was not to merge. Mathglot (talk) 17:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

---

Hard Seltzer is defined as

Hard seltzer, spiked seltzer or hard sparkling alcohol water is a type of highball drink containing carbonated water, alcohol, and often fruit flavoring.[1] In the US the alcohol is usually made by fermenting cane sugar; sometimes malted barley is used.[1] Hard seltzer products outside of the US have been found to use either neutral spirit,[2] or fermentation of fruit.[3] The alcohol by volume is around 5%[4] and the calorie-content is relatively low.[5][6] 

It is currently a stub article, and I think it should be merged with Alcopop. When I went to the talk page there, such a suggestion had already been made. The US dictionary Webster defines alcopop as ": a flavored beverage containing usually 4 to 6 percent alcohol", and doesn't mention Hard Seltzer [[1]]♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ^{♥ Talk ♥}

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with * '''Support''' or * '''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Oppose. I feel there is a big difference alcopops, which are usually very sweet, and the new hard seltzer category, which doesn't contain sugar or sweeteners. FakirNL (talk) 08:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

FakirNL neither Webster nor Wikipedia define alcopops as sweet. In any case I checked two of the hard seltzers listed in the article, and they both contain added sugar. https://mikeshard.co.uk/pages/faqs#:~:text=There%20are%20100%20kcal%20per,1.65%20UK%20units%20per%20can. https://ca.whiteclaw.com/faq/#:~:text=Ingredients%3A%20Carbonated%20water%2C%20Alcohol%2C,%2C%20Natural%20flavour%2C%20Citric%20acid.♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ^{♥ Talk ♥} 21:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose. The article Alcopop seems still to be a bit under discussion and is not yet globally neutral enough, and net yet balanced. Several alcoholic beverages seem to be put one one heap. The title Premixed alcoholic beverages seems to be more approriate. This would exclude the Hard Seltzers though, as these are genuinely brewed from sugar. --Arnaudleene (talk) 10:56, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Arnaudleene please check the links above - neither drink is "brewed from sugar", and both are flavoured & pre-mixed. Even if they were 'brewed from sugar", they would still meet the definition given in this article. While this article may not be perfect, that is not a good reason for having another article on the same subject under a different name, particularily if it encourages people to believe things that aren't true.♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ^{♥ Talk ♥} 18:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose Hard seltzer seems to be a new alcoholic category coming under the RTD (ready to drink) section which includes alcopops, cocktails in a can, low-alcoholic drinks etc. I don't think Coca-Cola would get involved in the category if they were seen to be alcopops. Alcopops became so notorious and ended up having so much bad press in the UK its best to keep the sections separate under the alcopop name, not because I am living in the UK but because premixed alcoholic beverages seems to be a bit of a mouthful. BECCLES81.152.238.125 (talk) 13:16, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose I have heard of hard seltzers but not alcopops. UserTwoSix (talk) 18:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

• Support In my opinion the best architecture would be Pre-Mixed Drinks as a big parent article, and then split that into categories like Hard Seltzer, Alcopop, Pre-mixed coctails etc. All of these are in the same category, have some overlaps and some differences largely based on commercial reasons. Hard Seltzer is definitely a step premium to the alcopops that were dominating this segment, much in the same way that craft beer is a step premium to normal commercial beer and a single origin specialty coffee is a step premium to a blended commercial coffee. But they're still the same drinks family and bringing them all together into one article will help readers to understand the general commercial landscape, what products are on the market, how they have similarities and differnces. 113.185.75.149 (talk) 07:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

References

References

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.

Merge Hard soda into this article.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was no consensus. Mathglot (talk) 17:48, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

---

Hard soda is defined as

Hard soda, also referred to as flavored beer, adult soda, fermented soda, mature soda and alcohol soda, is a type of alcoholic beverage and craft beer that is manufactured in the style of a soft drink.[1][2] It has gained recent prominence in the United States after the success of the Not Your Father's Root Beer brand manufactured by Small Town Brewery. As of late May 2016, at least 39 hard soda brands exist in the United States.

The US dictionary Webster defines alcopop as ": a flavored beverage containing usually 4 to 6 percent alcohol", and doesn't mention Hard soda [[2]]. It is a stub article, and it seems to me that it should be merged into this article.♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ^{♥ Talk ♥}

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with * '''Support''' or * '''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Oppose Soft oppose for now. "Hard soda" seems like a much more clear term for now. Suggest have a section in this article with use of the Main Template. UserTwoSix (talk) 18:40, 26 July 2021 (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.