Talk:Absinthe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Absinthe article.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2, 3
This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, now in the public domain.
Featured article star Absinthe is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 20, 2006.
Featured article star Absinthe is a selected article on the Food Portal, which means that it has been identified as a high quality article by Food Portal standards.
Peer review This page has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale (comments).
Archive
Archives
  1. July 2003 – February 2007
  2. March 2007 – August 2007
  3. September 2007 – February 2008


Contents

[edit] To-do

To-do list for Absinthe: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:


    [edit] Absinthe page

    203.43.117.187 (talk) 04:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)sphillips@smsmt.com It appears the link to "Dicklicker" has failed - not sure if this is factually correct, or whether site has been "inappropriately modified"

    • (add here)

    [edit] General Absinthe

    • Absinthiana --
      • Add sources
      • Include more history.
    • Absinthe in popular culture
      • Copy edit.
    • Modern absinthe -- (click red link to start article)
      • History of modern absinthe's development (especially the last 20 years).
      • History of internet involvement.
      • On going changes/developments.
      • Modern competitions and gatherings.

    [edit] Company pages

    Similar to other liquors, companies that are notable. Include history of company, information about products, any controversies.

    • Jade Liqueurs -- Owned by T.A. Breaux and others, a company that has a long history in the absinthe community as well as fairly well known and highly regarded products. (Company site)
    • Swiss absinthe distillers -- Currently Matter-Luginbühl (Company site), Kubler (Company site), Gaudentia Persoz (unknown company site, but press release) don't have pages.
    • Versinthe -- A popular absinthe made in france. Also produces a pastis available in america.
    • Mari Mayans -- very big in Spain, available in several supermarket chains.
    • Tabu absinth -- Popular in Germany and the Netherlands. Produces both anise and anise-free drinks. company site
    • Sebor absinth -- an interesting story of two brands, and two owners. Produced using a cold-filtration method.company site
    • La Fée Absinthe -- Copyedit the associated page about George Rowley. Morris K. (talk) 23:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
    • La Clandestine Absinthe -- Copy edit. Any brief suggestions? Alanmoss 11:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

    The goal of the To-do list is to get the absinthe section looking like sections on other liquors, with not only a history but neutral articles on significant companies as well.

    Other possible companies to add to the list, Francois Guy, Doubs, Xenta.

    What? Is there any reason why we should include company pages on this page?? If we are going to include those listed, we are going to have to include ALL companies such as Hill's etc. This seems crazy.24.17.253.57 (talk) 22:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
    Not on this page but for the companies or products significant to have their own page. The to do list is a generic list of anything absinthe related and is gathered here just to keep things in an organized spot. -- Ari (talk) 02:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
    Understood. However, who decides that a product or company is significant enough? Slippery slope! Who exactly proposed this company list? I did not find it in the talk archives? I assume it was someone who does not have involvement with one of the companies that happens to be listed there206.188.61.189 (talk) 21:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC).

    I think company ages are a good idea. I don’t think it needs much policing. As long as the material is factual I think it is ok. It would be a good way to keep proprietors off this page for the most part. That way they can obsess over their own page instead of this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightcafe1 (talk • contribs) 13:31, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

    So the only way to do it would be to allow ANY absinthe distillery to have a page and a link from the main absinthe page. Then where does it end? Would it be allowed for online absinthe retail shops? Come on now. This is obviously something that was come up with by someone with a motive. This Alanmoss has a vested interest.24.17.253.57 (talk) 03:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
    I agree a list isn't a great idea. For the most part the article should be written and when brands come up in recent history they should be linked to. Individual brand pages will stand or fall on wikipedia standards (in other words if nothing can be written about a brand beyond advertising it will eventually be trashed. However it's important to start treating absinthe like what it is, a liquor with an interesting past and thus follow a similar style as other liquors. -- Ari (talk) 04:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
    Agreed that brand pages can and should be attempted to be put up on Wikipedia and will stand or fail by themselves. However, why should they be associated in any way with the main absinthe page? Perhaps I am missing something?206.188.56.115 (talk) 21:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

    I just put it back. Perhaps we should move it to the bottom so it can become a laundry list? All the other alcohol sites have it? It seems only appropriate as we mature into one of them that our wikipedia site starts to look like theirs? no? -Night cafe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.49.154.166 (talk) 08:54, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

    Ok then. I just added several "brands" of absinthe to the main page. Now, who is to decide which ones deserve to stay, and which go? Enjoy. 206.188.56.115 (talk) 21:38, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
    I think you missed my point. For example, I see nothing wrong with linking to a hills page (even though many have a low opinion of their product) when Hills is mentioned in the modern revival. However it's important to remember what Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not, thus the giant list should be removed. Also, please don't edit the article to make a point that could easily be made here. -- Ari (talk) 02:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
    You may be right about my missing your point. Can you please re-explain to me why the above to do list includes "significant" companies that are to be included in the absinthe page? I would like to know who is deciding what a "significant" company is, and what their criteria are. It seems to me that there are only two fair ways to do this.
    1. Let any and all companies making absinthe be included.
    2. Do not include any companies not directly mentioned in the article.
    Regarding editing the article to make a point. I made my point here, but it wasn't coming across clearly. So I dropped my point and followed the line made by Night Cafe. This made it very clear how much of a bad idea it was, and quickly stopped two companies from getting unfair free promotion from the article. 206.188.62.99 (talk) 17:53, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


    I possibly wasn't clear, the to-do list isn't for stuff to be added to the absinthe page but a general absinthe to-do list. It's a list of companies that could have their own page on wikipedia (hence the red links, click on them and it will bring up a blank page to add content to). Then each of those pages will stand or fall based on how much information can be found of them. -- Ari (talk) 22:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
    I see now. That makes a lot more sense. Sorry for not understanding that part of the conversation. So, you mean that any absinthe producer can, and should, be put onto the "to-do" list. Then when something has been put onto wikipedia about that company, it will either stand or fall based on wikipedia's standards. Is that correct?206.188.53.193 (talk) 20:57, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

    Hey Guys. I will go with the consensus here but I want to go on record thinking that it might be good to have links to these pages on the absinthe page. If you go to Cognac for example you will find a brands section with a laundry list of notable brands. It seems usual to put it at the bottom of the page. It seems like a good way for companies producing the product to have to explain their offering in the context of the article. I see no reason not to have it? Its not a big deal though. Nightcafe1 (talk) 19:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)


    [edit] Heavy Metal Spiking

    I remember reading that old-school Absinthe producers would add heavy metals to the drink because they thought it would make it more green. But doing a find on the Absinthe pages reveals no such mention... Anyone know if this was perchance pure rumor or had any substantiation? Thanks for any info! --Xris0 (talk) 20:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

    For some reason that appears to have vanished from the article in its shambled state. Yes unscrupulous producers took advantage of the popularity and added metals and other chemicals to artificially create the green color and enhance the louche. -- Ari (talk) 20:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Wilde's evidence

    It seems the Wilde absinthe story is a myth: http://www.oxygenee.com/absinthe-effect/secondaries.html Siúnrá (talk) 20:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] New Orleans

    In the French Quarter of N.O. is the 'Original Old Absinthe House' which dates to 1806. The stuff cannot be obtained there because of the government ban but the place has historical importance for the tourist industry. Musicwriter (talk) 03:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

    The government ban is been semi lifted so eventually it should be possible to drink absinthe at the old absinthe house. I agree it does have historical importance, I just don't know enough about it to add it myself -- Ari (talk) 04:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

    Hello Ari and Music Writer. Knowing a bit about the old absinthe house I decided to add it into the history section along with a few other nuggets I picked up along the way. Let me know what you think. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightcafe1 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Complete edit

    Hello guys. I would like to propose a complete edit of this page. Since I did it last time I would volunteer to do it again. I think there should be several sub pages following the example of the absinthe in popular culture page (which I wrote originally). I simply think this page has become too long and mucky. The heading which should simply define the green nectar now includes pieces of history and a lot of marketing plugs. I would not change the content but reorder it to read like an encyclopedia page instead of a jumbled mess of marketing interests.

    We are all clearly passionate about different portions of the industry and history but I think we need a little discipline. The wine page for example is much clearer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightcafe1 (talk • contribs) 13:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


    I would like to call section 8 and subsection 8.1 to the attention of any potential editors. Further, there is a disconnect between information presented in that section and information present in the article page for thujone. Deshelm (talk) 22:20, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

    I have read these articles both from start to finish and I do not see any disconnect? Could you be more specific? The only thing I could see adding to the Absinthe page is a section on the accelerated firing of neurons and using that as a possible explanation for the secondary effects? I am not a scientist... Nightcafe1 (talk) 18:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Consolidate paragraphs?

    "International consumption" and "Historical" contain a lot of the same information. I'd have shifted it around a bit, but the above poster seems interested in rewriting the whole thing and knows more than I, so welcome to it. :) Mordant Kitten (talk) 02:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] New page to add to External Links section

    Hi,

    I noticed that the article might receive additional improvement if it contained some information (or resources) that offer user generated reviews or content such as blogs or product reviews.

    The URL http://www.absinthesugar.com/absinthe-reviews-absinthe-brands/ has some good product reviews, and the website also has a start-up blog for feedback: http://www.absinthesugar.com/?page=1

    I've found this to be a good resource, and has a stylish design, and I thought it would make a good addition to the external links section.

    What do you think? I wanted to get feedback before the link was added.

    Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.82.250.2 (talk) 21:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

    The article already has "resources that offer user generated reviews or content such as blogs or product reviews." Fee Verte and Wormwood Society are far more extensive than Absinthe Sugar and have huge review sections with a large number of user-generated reviews that conform to very structured rating systems. They also have a lot of historical and scientific content and WS has some user-generated content. Also, Absinthe Sugar suggests that browsers shop at www.originalabsinthe.com which sells products that do not meet the basic criteria to be called absinthe that is laid out in this article. That suggests a legitimacy that is not backed up by this article and there isn't information provided on the Absinthe Sugar website to contradict this article and necessitate its rewriting. By contrast, WS and FV offer links to many distributors. The question before adding Absinthe Sugar to the external links is, "what content does it contribute that the current external links do not?" The external links are not just for any absinthe-related sites; they should be the most informative and accurate sites available. Peridotmetal (talk) 23:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


    [edit] Effects

    I think the effects section should have an opening paragraph detailing the effects (and myths) of absinthe before discussing the history behind their discovery. And also some about different brands and types, somewhere in the article. Like, in the opening of the article, it says no evidence has shown it to be any more dangerous than ordinary spirits, but not dangerous doesn't mean not different. i.e. What makes absinthe different should be made more clear in the effect section. 69.220.2.188 (talk) 19:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

    There isn't any evidence that anything in particular in absinthe causes the much-ballyhooed "absinthe effect," nor has there been a study that indicates that absinthe causes any effects that are different from any other liquors. Any attempt to explain such things in the article would have to have citations and I don't think there's anything to cite. Peridotmetal (talk) 06:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Regulations

    The regulations section appears exceedingly weak. Notably Canada and Switzerland have no citations at all. Mr.tougas (talk) 00:45, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


    [edit] Green colouring (Scheele's Green) as the cause of toxicity?

    The article on Scheele's Green (an arsenic compound, used as a colourant) states that

     Despite its high toxicity, Scheele's Green was also used as a food dye for sweets, drink: the green in absinthe is now thought to be the  
 source of the problems with the liquor instead of the ingredient thujone

    This absinthe article has no reference to the original colouring - perhaps someone could add it, and elaborate on the relative toxicity of arsenic vs thujone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.171.29 (talk) 05:46, 5 May 2008 (UTC)