Why every entry has a source and a confirmation date

A source is a place to return to

This site attaches a source URL and a last-confirmed date to facts such as addresses, opening hours, visit conditions, varieties, founding years, and awards. The source explains why a fact is stated; the date shows when it was checked. Readers can return to the original official page and verify the wording or current operating conditions for themselves.

When an item cannot be verified, we do not fill it by inference. An official page may be unavailable, sources may conflict, or the date of an update may be unclear. In those cases, the field stays blank or is marked “not checked.” A blank means unknown, not that the condition does not apply. The purpose is to keep differences in certainty visible and make only the confirmed parts usable.

What is filled and what is not

The table shows how far each field has been checked alongside the number of producer records listed. Some fields, such as addresses and official websites, are often available, while opening hours, access, visits, tastings, and cultivated varieties still include unverified entries. The photo field is also empty. We do not yet have photographs whose rights and permitted use have been confirmed, so we do not fill the gap with someone else’s image or an image of unclear origin.

This is not a selection that includes only producers with rich information. Producers for whom only basic facts could be confirmed remain listed, and places where detail is missing remain visible. A completion share is a status of the research, not a ranking of importance, value, or the quality of a producer.

Why we do not assign scores

Our reading: A blank is better than an inference. Once an inference is displayed, it can be copied as if it were fact, while its uncertain origin becomes difficult to trace. A blank shows what is still unknown and what should be checked next. Many blanks are a weakness, but making the unfilled places visible has value in itself.

The editorial team also does not assign points or stars. We record third-party results published by competition organisers, rather than turning editorial preference into a number. The absence of an award is not treated as evidence against quality, and each record is shown in the context of what the competition actually assessed.

If information is wrong, out of date, or newly available, producers can request a correction or provide an update. We review the information, revise the entry, and update its confirmation date. This exchange lets the database grow from evidence instead of rushing to fill every blank.