Talk:Brown–Forman

Fair use rationale for Image:Brownforman.gif

Image:Brownforman.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:23, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Forman

How did the company get "Forman" in its name? Presumably there is some connection to Louis Forman of Bomberger's Distillery? —BarrelProof (talk) 00:49, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

cooperages

I would like to see information about the cooperages that BF operates. As I understand it, they have the main one in Louisville, Kentucky and another in Huntsville, Alabama that makes barrells just for Jack Daniel's. Is this the case? --rogerd (talk) 18:59, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 28 August 2018

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: Moved per the consensus below L293D (☎ • ✎) 18:12, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

---

• Brown-Forman → Brown–Forman
• Stitzel-Weller Distillery → Stitzel–Weller Distillery

– Shouldn't these be using dashes instead of hyphens, like Minneapolis–Saint Paul, Dallas–Fort Worth metroplex, Epstein–Barr virus, and Black–Scholes equation? —BarrelProof (talk) 17:07, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

• Support - per MOS:DASH which specifically covers this "In article titles, do not use a hyphen (-) as a substitute for an en dash..." The move will leave the required redirect. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:26, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
• Support per nom, per MOS:DASH. Paintspot Infez (talk) 01:10, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
• Question: @Timtempleton, Paintspot, and SMcCandlish: What about Wilkes-Barre Township and Wilkes-Barre? They are named after two people, like these. But Wilkes–Barre Township and Wilkes–Barre are red links! —BarrelProof (talk) 23:59, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

  Go for it - it's proper policy. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:29, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

  Yeah, that totally make sense! You might want to just set it up as a requested move, just in case anyone contests it. Paintspot Infez (talk) 00:53, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

  @Dicklyon: I just noticed that Wilkes–Barre Township, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania was moved to Wilkes-Barre Township, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania in 2014 by an editor who said "en dash is odd here, not supported by any known usage or guideline". —BarrelProof (talk) 04:52, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

  These are tough cases. Sometimes the name of a company or place named for a pair of people becomes so entrenched as an item that its origin as two names is totally suppressed. I think Wilkes-Barre is one of these, and Hewlett-Packard is another. For things like partnerships, the dash is most appropriate. I haven't investigated Brown-Forman and Stitzel-Weller yet. Dicklyon (talk) 05:14, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

  Hewlett-Packard seems like a very good example to think about. I see that you're actually the one who created the Hewlett–Packard redirect for it. Brown-Forman and Stitzel-Weller seem very similar to Hewlett-Packard. —BarrelProof (talk) 06:06, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

  Similar, but that's not necessarily the deciding point. In the case of "Brown, Forman & Co." here is about where they re-incorporated under the hyphenated name. I don't find any instances of it published with en dash, so probably it's OK, if Hewlett-Packard is (which I still have mixed feelings about; the HRHP lists it with a double hyphen, signifying an indended dash). Stitzel and Weller were two companies that merged but operated somewhat separately for a while it appears. Not sure it what matters about this. Dicklyon (talk) 02:57, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

  I just noticed the NRHP has Brown--Forman. So that signifies at least one important org decided to treat it as a dash. Dicklyon (talk) 03:09, 5 September 2018 (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.

Post hoc comment to forestall any re-RM stuff. It's Brown–Forman, Stitzel–Weller, Dallas–Fort Worth metroplex, etc., because these are mergers of comparable entities. It's Epstein–Barr and Black–Scholes because of a different convention, to use en dashes between surnames of co-discovers/proponents, to get around the problem of hyphenated surnames. But it's Hewlett-Packard and Wilkes-Barre with a hyphen because these are not mergers, and are just entities that happened to have two namesakes (which did not have to have been people's surnames, they just happen to be in this case). In a perfect world, the convention applied to surnames of discoverers and proponents would also be applied to corporations and co-founded towns, when they use surnames. But it just isn't the real-world case. However, you can probably bet money that if Chris Winston-Smyth and Jan van Diesel form a partnership and it uses their surnames that you'll get "Winston-Smyth–van Diesel" not "Winston-Smyth-van Diesel" (or they might use a "not conjoined with a horizontal line" form, like "Winston-Smyth van Diesel", "Winston-Smyth/van Diesel", or whatever some combination of their trademark lawyer and their logo designer come up with – maybe even WinstonSmythVanDiesel the way things are going these days).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  13:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)