Talk:Brown-Forman

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States: Kentucky / Louisville Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Kentucky portal This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Kentucky portal This article is supported by WikiProject Louisville (assessed as High-importance).

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Spirits Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirits, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spirits or Distilled beverages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpiritsWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritsTemplate:WikiProject SpiritsSpirits

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spirits WikiProject task list:

This list is transcluded from the tasks page, to edit it click here.

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Spirits:

Tagging all articles that fall under our scope with {{WikiProject Spirits}} and assessing their quality and importance to the project.

On 19 June 2025, it was proposed that this article be moved from Brown–Forman to Brown-Forman. The result of the discussion was moved.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

It was proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

The discussion has been closed, and the result will be found in the closer's comment.

Links: current log • target log

– 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)[reply]

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)[reply]
Support per nom, per MOS:DASH. Paintspot Infez (talk) 01:10, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
Go for it - it's proper policy. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 00:29, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Requested move 19 June 2025

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. noting that Wikipedia generally does not follow the spelling and punctuation of the topics themselves, and that this is based on MOS:ENBETWEEN, which we have a narrow consensus as applying here. Only one editor supported moving Stitzel–Weller Distillery, so another RM may be required if that is still desired. (closed by non-admin page mover) ASUKITE 13:19, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brown–Forman → Brown-Forman – The above RM was based on an error of fact. As noted in the post-hoc comment, hyphens are correct for a company named for multiple founders (regardless of whether they're correct for merged companies). That's is the case here. Brown-Forman is named for its two founders, not the result of a Brown company merging with a Forman company. The analogy to Hewlett-Packard is spot on. This needs to be moved back. oknazevad (talk) 11:09, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nominator. The hyphen is correct because this was not a merger, it was named after Brown and Forman already in the first place. See Hewlett-Packard. JIP | Talk 21:03, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support consensus above was not per MOS:ENBETWEEN which distincly indicates "Generally, use a hyphen in compounded proper names of single entities." which applies here. I think the other distillery should be moved back too. @Oknazevad:, any reason why you only put one of the two articles in the above RM on this one? Bensci54 (talk) 16:54, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Because Sitzel–Weller was formed by a merger, and so the rationale for a potential move is different than the one here, as I alluded to in my parenthetical.

To long-story-short it, there are three scenarios where namesakes could be hyphenated or dashed and there's been some inconsistency and misapplication involved. The first scenario is what we have here, a thing created as single entity from the start named after multiple founders. It's a permanent joining of names, which are pretty universally written with hyphens in reliable sources.

The second scenario is when the namesakes retain independence otherwise and the joint naming is the only connection, like co-discoverers of a scientific nature, or relations or connections between separate political jurisdictions, like a rail line or a treaty. Those are places where n-dashes are universal.

The third scenario is where there's some disagreement. This is when two formerly independent things are permanently joined and the newly formed combined entity takes its name from the predecessors, like a company merger. Moves, such as the one of Sitzel-Weller and here were made based on the idea that merged companies should have dashes as the namesakes were independent companies. That ignores, though, that the merged company is. Single entity and a permanent joining. In other words, they should be hyphenated but people got it wrong.

Plus I don't like multi-moves that are off on some different page. If I am going to nominate Sitzel-Weller, I'll do such separately at its own talk page. oknazevad (talk) 18:12, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support: companies can choose the typography of their own names, and this company uses a hyphen. Jruderman (talk) 02:58, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.