How to Write Wine Product Descriptions for SevenFifty

Write the description as a controlled product output

This guide is for alcohol importer operations teams, portfolio managers, and brand contributors preparing wine product descriptions for SevenFifty. It covers source collection, field mapping, product identity, writing structure, tasting and production language, claims review, approval, handoff, publication checks, vintage updates, and corrections.

The goal is one accurate description for the intended wine, vintage, package, distributor, and market. The workflow starts with a controlled product record and ends with verification of the published result. It does not assume that every SevenFifty account, distributor, or data route exposes the same fields or accepts updates in the same way.

Confirm the live destination before writing

Ask the distributor or authorized platform contact how the item is created, which fields the importer may supply, who publishes changes, and how the final entry can be reviewed. Record the exact account, distributor, market, product, and update route.

SevenFifty’s public online ordering guidance says products can appear in lists, tasting sheets, search results, and individual product pages. The same guidance says order details can include the SKU or item code, vintage, size format, and delivery instructions. That makes accurate product identity important, but it does not establish a public description limit, required writing format, or universal supplier workflow.

Use this destination control block:

Control	Required entry
Description record ID	Stable internal reference
SevenFifty account context	Distributor, supplier, or other authorized account involved
Distributor and division	Exact recipient and operating scope
Market	State, territory, channel, or other defined scope
Product and release	Producer, wine, vintage or non-vintage status, and package
Distributor item code	Assigned value, pending, or not applicable
Field destination	Exact field or data location confirmed in the current workflow
Field limit	Confirmed current limit or `not confirmed`
Update method	Portal entry, distributor submission, data feed, support route, or other confirmed process
Publisher	Person or organization able to make the change
Reviewer	Person able to inspect the published result
Status	Collecting, drafting, in review, approved, submitted, published, corrected, or superseded
Source packet	Controlled evidence location
Revision	Current description revision

Do not trim copy to an assumed character count. Do not claim that a field is required unless the current account, distributor instructions, or authorized platform guidance confirms it.

Separate product identity, sales copy, and platform data

A wine description is one part of a larger item record. Keep three layers distinct:

Layer	Purpose	Examples	Deciding source
Product and release identity	Establish which wine the text describes	Producer, brand, wine, vintage, origin, class or type	Approved product and label records
Sales description	Explain the wine clearly to a trade reader	Place, material production choices, sensory profile, service context	Verified producer evidence and approved editorial record
Platform and distributor data	Connect the description to the sellable item	Distributor code, importer SKU, bottle volume, case pack, availability	Controlled item, commercial, and distributor records

Do not place a changing price, inventory quantity, or temporary program inside evergreen product prose. Do not let a distributor code become part of the wine name. Keep each value in the field and approval path intended for it.

Build the source packet before drafting

Collect evidence for the exact release. An old tech sheet can be a lead, but it should not silently become the source for a new vintage.

Use this source inventory:

Source	Product scope	Owner	Fields supported	Revision or date context	Status
Approved product identity record	[Exact release]	[Owner]	Producer, brand, wine, vintage	[Revision]	[Status]
Approved label set	[Exact package]	[Owner]	Label-facing identity and package facts	[Revision]	[Status]
Producer technical file	[Exact release]	[Owner]	Vineyard, blend, harvest, fermentation, aging, analysis	[Revision]	[Status]
Producer confirmation	[Exact question]	[Owner]	Resolved or newly confirmed fact	[Context]	[Status]
Tasting record	[Exact wine and vintage]	[Owner]	Sensory observations	[Context]	[Status]
Certification evidence	[Product, site, or producer scope]	[Owner]	Approved certification wording	[Scope]	[Status]
Accolade evidence	[Exact wine and vintage]	[Owner]	Publication, result, attribution	[Context]	[Status]
Item master	[Exact market item]	[Owner]	SKU, volume, pack, identifiers	[Revision]	[Status]
Distributor confirmation	[Exact distributor item]	[Owner]	Recipient code and publishing treatment	[Context]	[Status]

Mark each fact confirmed for this release, confirmed unchanged, changed, awaiting evidence, not approved for publication, or not applicable. A blank cannot distinguish unknown from unchanged.

Use a reusable description intake template

Complete the intake before turning facts into prose. Keep internal source and approval columns even when they will not appear on SevenFifty.

Product identity

Field	Working value	Source	Approval
Producer	[Approved name]	[Source]	[Status]
Brand	[Approved name]	[Source]	[Status]
Wine or cuvee	[Approved name]	[Source]	[Status]
Vintage status	[Vintage or non-vintage wording]	[Source]	[Status]
Wine class or type	[Approved wording]	[Source]	[Status]
Country	[Approved wording]	[Source]	[Status]
Region and appellation	[Approved wording]	[Source]	[Status]
Variety or blend	[Verified wording and percentages when approved]	[Source]	[Status]
Vineyard or site	[Verified name and relevance]	[Source]	[Status]
ABV	[Approved value]	[Source]	[Status]
Bottle volume	[Approved value]	[Source]	[Status]

Production details

Field	Working value	Source	Publish?
Farming or site practice	[Verified detail]	[Source]	[Yes, no, or pending]
Harvest	[Verified detail]	[Source]	[Yes, no, or pending]
Fermentation	[Vessel, method, or other material fact]	[Source]	[Yes, no, or pending]
Maceration or extraction	[Verified detail]	[Source]	[Yes, no, or pending]
Aging	[Vessel, material, duration, and treatment]	[Source]	[Yes, no, or pending]
Finishing	[Lees, filtration, fining, dosage, or other relevant detail]	[Source]	[Yes, no, or pending]
Technical analysis	[Approved values and units]	[Source]	[Yes, no, or pending]
Production distinction	[Specific fact that matters to a trade reader]	[Source]	[Yes, no, or pending]

Sensory and service details

Field	Working value	Source	Approval
Aroma	[Specific observations]	[Source]	[Status]
Palate	[Specific observations]	[Source]	[Status]
Structure	[Acidity, tannin, body, sweetness, texture, alcohol impression]	[Source]	[Status]
Finish	[Specific character and length without unsupported ranking]	[Source]	[Status]
Service	[Temperature, glassware, decanting, or other supported guidance]	[Source]	[Status]
Pairing	[Specific foods, dishes, or occasions]	[Source]	[Status]
Drinking context	[Current service or cellaring guidance when supported]	[Source]	[Status]

Claims and commercial context

Field	Working value	Source	Approval
Certification	[Exact approved wording and scope]	[Source]	[Status]
Award or review	[Publication, wine, vintage, result, attribution]	[Source]	[Status]
Producer history	[Specific supported fact]	[Source]	[Status]
Importer	[Approved market-facing identity]	[Source]	[Status]
Importer SKU	[Value]	[Source]	[Status]
Distributor item code	[Value or pending]	[Source]	[Status]
Case pack	[Value]	[Source]	[Status]
Availability wording	[Approved operational state]	[Source]	[Status]

Not every approved field belongs in the final description. The intake exists so the writer can select useful facts without guessing.

Draft in the order a trade reader needs

A useful description identifies the wine first, then explains what makes it distinct. Use a short sequence that remains understandable when separated from a sell sheet or presentation.

Start with exact identity

The opening sentence should let a reader identify the product without decoding marketing language. Name the producer, wine, vintage status, place, and variety or style when those details are approved and useful.

Working pattern:

[Producer] [Wine] [Vintage status] is a [wine type or variety] from [approved region or appellation], made from [approved fruit or blend description].

Remove any bracketed element that is not relevant or supported. Do not add a geographic, estate, or varietal claim merely to make the sentence sound complete.

Explain the meaningful distinction

Follow identity with one or two concrete facts that separate the wine from similar entries. A site, farming choice, fermentation method, aging vessel, blending decision, or family practice can be useful when it is specific and sourced.

Weak:

A beautiful expression of exceptional terroir made with passion.

Stronger:

Fruit comes from [verified site], and the wine is fermented in [verified vessel] before [verified aging treatment].

The stronger version is useful only when every bracketed statement has release-specific support.

Describe the sensory profile

Move from aroma to palate, structure, and finish. Use specific, readable language. Distinguish tasting observation from measured analysis and service advice.

A compact pattern is:

Aromas of [specific observations] lead to [palate observations], with [structure or texture] and a [finish description] finish.

Do not stack long lists of fruit, flowers, spices, minerals, and textures. Select the observations that best identify the wine. Avoid using dry, sweet, light, full-bodied, or similar structural terms when the source and tasting record do not support them.

End with practical context

When useful and approved, close with service, pairing, or trade context. Keep temporary inventory, pricing, and promotions in their governed fields rather than embedding them in prose.

Serve [approved guidance] with [specific pairing or occasion]. For current item, availability, and ordering information, use the distributor record for [market item].

Build a complete description from the template

Use this as a drafting structure, not as fixed platform syntax:

[Producer] [Wine] [Vintage status] is a [wine identity] from [approved place], made from [approved variety or blend]. [Specific site, producer, or production distinction]. [Material fermentation and aging details]. Aromas of [observations] lead to [palate], with [structure] and a [finish] finish. [Approved service or pairing guidance].

Then create a shorter approved version if the confirmed destination requires one:

[Wine identity and place]. [Most useful production distinction]. [Concise sensory and structural profile].

Do not shorten by removing the product identity while keeping broad adjectives. If space is limited, preserve identity, one meaningful production fact, and a clear sensory summary before secondary story details.

Make the prose specific without overstating it

Replace praise with evidence. The description should help a buyer understand the wine, not ask the buyer to accept an unsupported ranking.

Avoid	Prefer when supported
Exceptional terroir	Named site, exposure, elevation, soil description, or growing condition from an approved source
Handcrafted with passion	Specific harvest, cellar, blending, or aging choice
World-class producer	Relevant producer history, ownership, place, or practice
Perfectly balanced	Observable relationship among acidity, tannin, alcohol, sweetness, fruit, and texture
Pairs with everything	A short list of dishes or service situations
Award-winning	Publication, exact wine, vintage, result, and approved attribution
Organic	Exact certification or approved practice wording with scope
Limited	Confirmed production or allocation context and an owner-approved reason to publish it

Delete a claim when the evidence is weak, unclear, or attached to another release. More adjectives do not repair missing support.

Keep origin, variety, and vintage wording controlled

Product descriptions often repeat label-facing identity. That makes the approved label and compliance record important sources, but the sales description remains a separate output.

TTB’s wine labeling guidance identifies federal wine-label topics including brand name, class or type, alcohol content, name and address, net contents, and appellation of origin when applicable. Use the compliance owner’s approved source for product identity. Do not treat a SevenFifty description as the label or as evidence that a label statement is permitted.

Review these fields together:

Identity check	Question
Producer and brand	Does the spelling and hierarchy match the approved market record?
Wine and cuvee	Is the displayed name exact and free of an outdated internal nickname?
Vintage status	Does the prose describe the release connected to this item?
Country, region, and appellation	Is the geographic wording approved for this wine and market?
Variety or blend	Are names, order, and percentages current and supported?
ABV and volume	Do they match the exact package if included?
Importer identity	Is the market-facing entity current where referenced?

The TTB Public COLA Registry provides information on approved, expired, surrendered, and revoked COLAs. Use registry information as a verification input, then retain the exact certificate and package review used by the responsible compliance owner. A registry result alone does not establish that the product description, bottle image, physical package, or current market status is correct.

Control production facts and certifications

A production description should name only choices that materially help the reader understand the wine. Record the unit, duration, vessel, material, proportion, or process detail when it matters and is confirmed.

Check for common source conflicts:

fermentation vessel differs between the producer sheet and prior sell sheet
aging duration was copied from another vintage
new oak proportion lacks a current source
vineyard or village spelling changed during translation
blend percentages do not total as expected
residual sugar or acidity uses an unclear unit
certification wording exceeds the scope of the certificate
unfiltered or unfined appears in copy without release-specific confirmation

Do not resolve a technical conflict by choosing the more marketable value. Assign it to the product or producer owner and hold the affected sentence until the source is clear.

For certifications, preserve the distinction among producer, facility, vineyard, farming practice, and certified product. The internal record should contain the certifying organization, scope, evidence, wording, owner, and current status before the claim enters the description.

Write tasting notes for recognition, not performance

A tasting note should help a buyer recognize style and fit. Build it from an approved tasting record for the exact release.

Use this sensory control:

Element	Questions
Aroma	Which few observations are clearest and most characteristic?
Palate	Which flavors or savory elements continue or change?
Acidity	How does it shape freshness and pace?
Tannin	What are its amount, grain, and placement when relevant?
Body and texture	How does the wine feel rather than how impressive is it?
Sweetness	Is the wording consistent with the approved product understanding?
Finish	What remains, without turning length into an unsupported quality ranking?
Service	What guidance has the winery or portfolio owner approved?

Avoid false precision. If tasters disagree about a narrow aroma, choose broader accurate language or omit it. Do not copy the producer’s note unchanged when it conflicts with the importer team’s approved style or the actual release evidence.

Verify accolades and historical statements

Treat an award, score, quotation, founding story, vineyard age, family generation, and production quantity as a sourced claim.

Use a claim register:

Claim	Exact product scope	Source	Approved wording	Owner	Status
[Claim]	[Producer, wine, vintage, and market]	[Evidence]	[Publishable text]	[Owner]	[Status]

For an accolade, confirm the publication, reviewer when applicable, wine, vintage, result, source location, quotation accuracy, and approved use. Keep a producer-level award out of product-level copy unless the wording makes that scope clear.

For history, replace vague statements such as centuries of tradition with a specific supported event that matters to the wine. If the available record cannot establish the date, generation, ownership, or continuity implied by the draft, remove the claim.

Map the description to the market item

The prose can be correct and still be attached to the wrong item. Verify the relationship among the product, release, package, distributor, and platform entry.

Mapping field	Controlled entry
Product record	Continuing wine identity
Release record	Exact vintage or non-vintage expression
Market item	Exact volume, pack, market, and route
Importer SKU	Importer-owned item reference
Consumer identifier	Verified bottle-level identifier when used
Case identifier	Verified case-level identifier when used
Distributor item code	Distributor-assigned value or pending status
SevenFifty context	Confirmed account, listing, or update target
Description revision	Exact approved text revision
Published record	Link or evidence used for final inspection

Do not use a distributor item code as the only product identity. Do not attach a successor-vintage description to a predecessor listing because the names are similar. Keep the current description connected to the exact item and transition decision.

Create versions for purpose, not uncontrolled rewrites

The full approved description should be the editorial source. Derive shorter or channel-specific versions from it without introducing new claims.

Version	Intended use	Content rule	Approval
Full trade description	Confirmed SevenFifty destination or distributor review	Complete identity, distinction, production, sensory, and practical context as appropriate	Product, brand, and compliance review
Short description	Confirmed limited destination	Preserve identity and highest-value supported details	Same fact review as full version
Tasting summary	Tasting sheet or sales reference when requested	Sensory and structure only, linked to exact release	Product and brand review
Distributor-specific version	Named market or recipient need	Change only approved market, item, or audience context	Operations and affected owners
Successor-vintage version	New release	Rebuilt from successor evidence	Full release review

Record which version was submitted and published. Do not label several different texts current without identifying their purpose and destination.

Run fact, editorial, and compliance review separately

One approval checkbox can hide unresolved ownership. Use review lanes:

Review	Reviewer responsibility
Product	Producer, wine, vintage, origin, varieties, production facts, and sensory accuracy
Compliance	Label-facing identity, regulated or certification-sensitive wording, and market concerns
Item data	SKU, distributor code, package, and listing relationship
Brand	Voice, clarity, differentiation, and approved terminology
Commercial	Availability or market context when included
Operations	Destination, revision, approvers, handoff, publication, and downstream tracking

Approve the exact final text, not a source sheet that a writer later paraphrases. If a reviewer changes a factual sentence, send that change back through the appropriate owner before publication.

Use comments or a change log that records the old text, new text, reason, owner, and approval. Remove internal notes and unresolved flags from the recipient version.

Use this reusable handoff template

Preserve the exact approved text and instructions sent to the distributor or authorized publisher.

Handoff control

Field	Required entry
Handoff ID	Stable reference
Distributor and market	Exact recipient scope
SevenFifty context	Confirmed account, product, and destination field
Product identity	Producer, wine, vintage status, volume, and item code
Description revision	Approved text identifier
Requested action	Create, replace, correct, review, or confirm
Publisher	Person or team expected to make the change
Response requested	Publication confirmation, question, or exception
Supporting files	Only the approved product record or assets needed for the task
Sender	One importer operations contact
Status	Draft, sent, accepted, published, corrected, or closed
Evidence	Exact message, text, files, recipients, and response

Handoff message

Subject: SevenFifty product description update for [Producer] [Wine] [Vintage]

Please [create or replace] the product description for [exact product and distributor item code] in [confirmed account or market context].

Approved description revision: [Revision]

Approved text:

[Paste exact approved description]

Product scope: [Producer, wine, vintage status, bottle volume, market, and distributor]

Requested confirmation: [Published result, exception, or required correction]

Please route questions or conflicts to [single importer contact] rather than editing factual claims without review.

If the publisher needs a different length or format, request the confirmed constraint and create an approved derivative. Do not ask the recipient to shorten factual copy without a review route.

Verify the published result

Submission is not completion. Inspect the live result in the context available to the importer or distributor.

Check:

description is attached to the correct producer, wine, vintage, package, and distributor item
complete text appears without clipping, broken characters, duplicated paragraphs, or visible markup
accents, apostrophes, symbols, and capitalization render correctly
paragraphs and spacing remain readable
no internal notes, placeholders, source citations, or approval labels were pasted into the public description
the bottle image and adjacent identity fields describe the same release
SKU or item code, vintage, and size context do not conflict with the prose
the former description is no longer presented as current for the same item
the exact published text is captured or otherwise retained according to the team’s process

Record submitted, published, verified, and corrected as separate states. Name the reviewer and evidence for the final check.

Handle vintage updates as a new description release

Create a successor record and preserve the predecessor text. Do not replace the year and assume the rest remains accurate.

Use this rollover table:

Description element	Prior release	Successor release	Decision
Product and vintage identity	[Prior]	[Successor]	Confirm exact listing relationship
Appellation and sites	[Prior]	[Successor evidence]	Changed or confirmed unchanged
Variety and blend	[Prior]	[Successor evidence]	Reapprove names and percentages
Harvest and production	[Prior]	[Successor evidence]	Rewrite from current technical file
Aging	[Prior]	[Successor evidence]	Confirm vessel, material, and duration
ABV and analysis	[Prior]	[Successor evidence]	Use current package and technical source
Tasting note	[Prior]	[Successor tasting record]	Do not carry forward without review
Service and pairing	[Prior]	[Successor decision]	Confirm current guidance
Certifications	[Prior]	[Successor evidence]	Confirm product and market scope
Accolades	[Prior]	[Successor evidence]	Keep release attribution exact
Item codes and package	[Prior]	[Successor treatment]	Confirm issuer and distributor decision
Publication state	[Prior status]	[Successor status]	Define overlap and replacement timing

Ask the distributor or publisher whether the successor updates an existing entry, receives a separate entry, or follows another process. Do not apply one distributor’s answer to every account.

During overlap, keep both descriptions and item relationships clear. Search the successor text and handoff package for the predecessor vintage, old codes, old analysis, old accolades, and old availability wording.

Correct errors at the source

If the published description contains an incorrect fact, do not patch only the platform text. A local correction leaves the source ready to recreate the error elsewhere.

Use this correction process:

Identify the incorrect text, correct text, product, vintage, market, distributor, and affected entry.
Confirm the correct value with the accountable source owner.
Update the controlled product, claim, or item record.
Find every description version, tech sheet, sell sheet, deck, catalog, and handoff that repeats the error.
Repeat the required product, compliance, brand, item, and operations approvals.
Create a replacement description revision.
Send a correction that states the affected item, prior text, replacement text, and requested action.
Mark the earlier revision superseded without deleting its history.
Inspect the published replacement.
Record recipient acknowledgment and downstream completion.

A second reviewer should be able to trace the correction from the source decision to the verified published result.

Run the complete description workflow

Confirm the destination. Record account context, distributor, market, field, publisher, reviewer, and any current constraint.
Select the exact item. Link producer, wine, vintage status, package, importer SKU, and distributor code.
Assemble the source packet. Gather approved identity, labels, technical details, tasting records, claims, item data, and distributor confirmation.
Classify every field. Mark confirmed, changed, pending, unpublished, or not applicable.
Resolve conflicts. Send inconsistent facts to the accountable owner before drafting.
Complete the intake template. Preserve sources and approvals beside every material fact.
Draft the full description. Lead with identity, then distinction, production, sensory profile, and practical context.
Remove unsupported language. Replace broad praise with specific evidence or delete it.
Review claims. Confirm certifications, accolades, history, quantities, and comparative language.
Map the text to the item. Verify the release, package, market, distributor, and target entry.
Create required derivatives. Shorten only after the destination constraint is confirmed.
Review by function. Obtain product, compliance, item-data, brand, commercial, and operations approval as applicable.
Send one controlled handoff. Include exact text, revision, item scope, requested action, and response route.
Capture publication. Record the publisher’s confirmation or exception.
Inspect the live result. Verify attachment, rendering, adjacent identity, and replacement state.
Maintain currentness. Reopen the record for vintage, package, code, claim, certification, distributor, or source changes.
Correct through a replacement. Update the source first and verify every affected downstream output.

Depletement’s pre-launch importer operations workspace is being designed to organize product and catalog details, bottle and brand assets, tech sheets, sell sheets, distributor asset access, and vintage updates. Until a pre-launch product becomes part of an approved process, keep the description workflow in controls the team can inspect and verify.

Complete final wine description QA

Run this checklist against the controlled source record, exact approved text, handoff, and published result.

Destination and item scope

Account context, distributor, division, market, publisher, reviewer, and destination field are explicit.
Any field limit or format requirement comes from the current workflow rather than assumption.
Producer, brand, wine, vintage status, package, importer SKU, and distributor code identify one exact item.
Product, release, market item, and description revision remain separate and linked.
The description is attached to the intended listing or update target.
Submission, publication, verification, correction, and closure use separate statuses.

Sources and product facts

Every material fact has a current source, owner, product scope, and approval state.
Old tech sheets, sell sheets, emails, and predecessor descriptions were treated as leads rather than automatic authority.
Unknown, unchanged, changed, pending, unpublished, and not-applicable values are distinguished.
Producer, wine, vintage, class or type, origin, appellation, varieties, ABV, and volume match approved sources where used.
Vineyard, harvest, fermentation, aging, finishing, and analysis details describe the correct release.
Units, proportions, durations, names, accents, and translations were checked.
Conflicting source values were resolved by the accountable owner.

Writing and usefulness

The opening identifies the wine before introducing story or praise.
The description explains one or more specific, supported distinctions.
Production details are selected for relevance rather than copied as a complete cellar log.
The tasting note moves clearly through aroma, palate, structure, and finish as appropriate.
Service and pairing guidance is specific and approved.
Temporary price, inventory, and program information remains outside evergreen prose.
Generic superlatives and unsupported comparisons were removed.
A shorter derivative preserves identity and useful facts rather than only adjectives.

Claims and compliance boundaries

Label-facing identity comes from the approved compliance source.
The description is not presented as the bottle label, COLA, or regulatory approval.
Certification wording preserves the certified product, producer, facility, vineyard, or practice scope.
Awards and reviews match the publication, wine, vintage, result, attribution, and approved use.
Historical dates, generations, ownership, vineyard age, and production quantities have evidence when stated.
Subjective tasting language is not presented as laboratory or certification fact.
Compliance-sensitive questions remain with the qualified owner for the market.

Approval and handoff

Product, compliance, item-data, brand, commercial, and operations reviewers approved their sections as applicable.
The exact final text received approval after the last factual edit.
Full, short, tasting, distributor-specific, and successor versions have distinct purposes and revisions.
Handoff identifies distributor, market, target entry, exact item, revision, publisher, and requested action.
The exact message, approved text, supporting files, recipients, and response are retained.
The recipient has a single route for questions and factual conflicts.
A requested length or format change produces an approved derivative rather than an uncontrolled edit.