Talk:Absinthe/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Absinthe. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Untitled

Contrary to popular belief, the flavor of absinthe does not come from wormwood. It comes primarily from anise or star anise. The production method of absinthe is indeed fermentation of wormwood, but this produces such an incredibly bitter drink that anise is added to cover up the wormwood taste (which doesn't really have much of a taste besides bitterness), and it's the anise that gives it the recognizable taste. In fact, absinthe's taste differs very little from that of other anise-based drinks that do not contain wormwood (such as the Greek ouzo or the French pastis). Delirium 02:18 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)

absinthe is not fermented, it is macerated in alcohol and then distilled. fermentation is when the ingredient creates it's own alcohol (such as grapes, beets, potatoes, etc) which is not possible with an absinthe plant.

Try it

Absinthe is damn best drink ever crafted by man. Disregarding your local laws, try it man;-) (jokingly)

Some unanswered questions..

No content is present describing the effects of absinthe aside from the few going insane from toxicity. What does it do for people?

I'll see if I can add something about that. Ari 00:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Interestingly, no discussion on legal status in US. I got an impression absinthe is still illegal over there?

Also, about the thujone content... was it generally higher before the criminalization before the criminalization around Europe?

"It is probably illegal for someone outside the country to sell such a product to a citizen living in the US." - If that person sent the parcel from a country in which the United States has no jurisdiction and where absinthe sales are legal, how can that be illegal? David.Monniaux 08:46, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You're generally not allowed to mail things to a country that are illegal in that country. If it was legal in the country it was sent from this wouldn't be extradictable, but the person might well be unable to travel to the US in the future if they wished to avoid arrest if it were something major (with absinthe I doubt they blacklist people). The same principle applies if you try to mail anti-government pamphlets to China—it's not illegal in the US to mail anti-government pamphlets to China, but you better make sure you never plan to visit China. --Delirium 08:53, Apr 28, 2004 (UTC)

I think there's an essential point of law here. In many countries (I don't know about the US, but I know this is the case in France), criminal law is restricted to actions committed by people on the national territory of that country, with narrow, well-defined exceptions. This means that it is impossible to prosecute somebody for an action committed abroad, outside from the narrow exceptions.

Of course, there is a different issue with gaining entrance to the national territory – which is largely not an issue of criminal laws. Some countries, like the US, vest in the executive a discretionary choice for allowing entrance to foreigners. It is possible that, even though some action is not criminally reprehensible, the US government still considers it inappropriate and bans the foreigner from the US.

For instance, on older US immigration forms (I don't know whether this is still current), they asked you whether you were a prostitute or where involved in other immoral activities. You could be prohibited from entering the US on those grounds, even if you were from a country were being a prostitute was legal. Ditto for being a Communist. David.Monniaux 09:01, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

So now that there is increased Absinthe production in the EU, many companies are shipping to the US. My understanding of the legality concerned was that Absinthe is not *illegal* per se, but instead it is governed by the FDA, and perhaps falls into status as some sort of poison. --Morbid-o 17:42, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Basically, that's right. It's not regulated as a controlled substance, it's regulated as a "food additive" because its essentially works as a nerve toxin, which puts it under the FDA's purview. So, I think the general feeling here in the US is that it's probably not illegal to possess it, and it's probably not illegal to buy it, but it would be illegal for a company to try to manufacture it in the US (because then it's adding a banned "food additive"), and presumably would be illegal to try to sell that manfuactured product here. Stuff can and does get confiscated at Customs, but I don't think there's any real consequence (I could be wrong here). You're just out your stuff. Katefan0 21:43, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

It should be noted thujone is only a nerve toxin in large doses. It is regulated in wormwood but other common herbs such as sage are believed to contain thujone as well but aren't regulated. Ari 22:20, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Interesting; what would be considered a "large dose?" Katefan0 16:49, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)

according to the links under NPOV... below, the convulsive ED50 of thujone in mice is 35.5mg/kg--Morbid-o 17:37, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Does anyone know if there is indeed any connection between the popularity of ouzo and the prohibition of absinthe as suggested by the edits of 208.30.83.56? Pastis is sensible as it was created by many of the same companies that were producing the absinthe, but in my experience Ouzo is something that they serve you after you eat at a Greek restaurant. I see on the ouzo page that it now references absinthe, but that is all the work of the same contributor the information is supposedly from the Encyclopædia Britannica, but lacking any linked source. To me, this seems similar to claiming Sambuca is a substitute for absinthe. I'm reluctant to change anything, since I don't have the knowledge to say one thing or the other, but I'm posting here in hopes that someone else might be able to provide more info. --Morbid-o 14:14, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard such a thing personally, but that doesn't make it untrue. Ouzo is similar to absinthe in that it too uses essential oils in its manufacature, and is often used as an absinthe substitute along with pernod, herb sainte, sambuca, etc., but those are the only links I know of. · Katefan0^(scribble) 18:30, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
In general, anise and fennel do a great job of covering up the taste of poorly distilled alcohol (one factor in absinthe's initial popularity). This, as much as anything else (i.e. the great taste) is an important reason why "anis"-type beverages (also arak, raki, tsipouro, probably others) are popular in so many places. ZacharyS 16:39, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

What about vermouth?

Vermouth is also made with wormwood (specifically, the flowers IIRC), and the word "vermouth" itself comes from a word for "wormwood."

I have also read that vermouth contains a good deal of thujone. It is also, of course, legal. This would seem to invalidate much of the comments about legality in the US, at least the reasoning.--The Fay

Chartreuse is in the category, too. One would assume that the heavy hand of regulation has not come down on these drinks because there have never been any real or imagined problems associated with them. ZacharyS 16:41, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Translation

From Wikipedia:Translation into English:

Article: fr:Absinthe
Corresponding English-language article: Artemisia absinthium
Worth doing because: Material to incorporate into English-language article
Originally Requested by: 80.160.122.64 00:43, 29 May 2004 (UTC)
Status: Completed -- started by Pepita 9 Sept 2004 -- completed by --Andrewgardner1 23:32, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Other notes: It seems like the French article is both about plant and the liquor but I think there is some useful material there.
- No, it is still not complete, does someone want to pick up the ball? -- Jmabel | Talk 05:34, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
- I would like to pick up the ball on this one, but please be patient as I am completely new to Wikipedia and there will be a bit of a learning curve for me. There IS some information that still needs to be brought over from the French. As noted below, there is also info there on the liquor, which seems to belong in the English Absinthe article. I will cross-reference this French article with that article too to see if it has anything to add to that one as well. I will update here when I am done. --Andrewgardner1 23:32, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Yay, I'm done! I've translated ALL of the information in the fr:Absinthe article and brought it over to the Artemisia absinthium, Absinthe, and Pernod Fils articles. I suppose you can remove this entry from this page whenever you want to. --Andrewgardner1 23:51, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

NPOV Adjustment Needed

In the "Polemic" section the following sentence appears:

"More recent studies have shown that very little of the thujone present in absinthe actually makes it into a properly distilled absinthe, even one re-created using historical recipes and methods, so much so that a recent French distiller has had to add pure wormwood essential oil to make a "high-thujone" variant of his product to cater to those who still want to believe that thujone is an important ingredient in absinthe."

The "those who still want to believe" snark is not NPOV. What should it say instead? --AStanhope 23:48, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

- This seems easy enough to fix. I'd propose something like: "to cater to interested customers," or maybe even just delete everything after "product." I'm not sure it really adds anything to comment on who those customers might be. Katefan0 16:02, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion... I nixed all text after "product." --AStanhope 20:24, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Is there a source for this? I don't dispute it, but I'm curioous since I've seen "high thujone" absinthe that purports traditional recipes. --Morbid-o 17:35, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Here are two sources, http://www.feeverte.net/thujone.html and http://www.emmert-analytik.de/DLR_100_9_S352-356.pdf It used to be thought that traditional recipes would produce high amounts of thujone based on what went into the still, but tests show otherwise. Someone distillers may have not gotten around to correcting this, or choose not to because of the sales hyping thujone provides. Ari 22:20, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

commercial links

What is everyones opinion of the set of links in the external links section, especially the movie links? It would be nice to keep this page neutral especially with the large amount of vendors that have been posted by fans or the vendors themselves. I don't think videos with "Buy absinthe at [vendors site]" are appropriate and in keeping with the idea of a neutral article. Ari 22:20, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I'm relatively new to the 'active' wikipedia community, but I think commercial links detract from the article. However, maybe if a video is informative, with only a short blurb about purchase, it could be kept? Admittedly, I haven't watched the videos (I'm at work...) Also, thanks for the links above, not only did I find what I was looking for, but they provided some interesting speculations on the pharmacology. --Morbid-o 13:32, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Personally I am divided about the idea of including links to places where you can buy absinthe. In pretty much any other article, I wouldn't hesitate -- it would be a no. We're not here to give free advertising to certain retailers. BUT, given that absinthe is somewhat hard to obtain in certain parts of the world, it makes me hesitate a bit. I still tend to lean toward non-inclusion, though. Anybody interested enough and resourceful enough can find a way to buy it (I did). Katefan0 16:52, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)

The videos had a very brief mention of the site hosting the videos that obviously put them together too. If he is paying for the bandwidth to host the videos, and they are useful and well done, why not let them be there?

Comercial links. For the reasons already mentioned. The site name isn't brief, the video has "Buy absinthe at [vendors site]" across the bottom for the duration. Even if the videos do provide some useful information such as a demonstration of the rituals, I don't think free advertising should be given to anyone. I would say the same thing if a video made by my favorite vendor was linked here.

Erowid. I removed the Erowid link because although they often provide good information, in this case a lot of it is redundant and some of it is outdated and wrong.Ari 02:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

absinthx-guidex.dex

Hi there!

I am Alex and the webmaster of the website absinth-guide.de. The only commercial thing about this website are the two banners, one at the top and the other one at the left.

"NO original information"? Oh right, only the comparison of prizes, the buyers guide in English and German, a lot of brief and serious information, the big forum, the list of the bars and restaurants, onlineshops, offline-shops... Okay, this is not in english, but the buyers guide is. That's why I linked it.

Believe me, I'm not making money with this webiste and only get some Eurocents for clicks of visitors at the banners.

So please tell me why people always remove the link.

Best regards, Alex

I looked over the sites and I don't understand how the person is claiming the two sites are connected. I put back the buyers guide. The whole site may be good but being in german makes it not the best link for the english version of the article. Ari 21:15, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

The thing with the English language is right. Tha's why I linked to the english buyers guide as you did now. But there are also a lot of English speaking people who speak at least a little German too. So it's not that bad link. Thank you so far, Alex.

I am always a little suspicious of people who are so anxious to have their own websites linked off of a Wikipedia page, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I went to the site, and it doesn't seem terribly useful to me. There are other absinthe guides that are primarily English language that are already linked from the article. No offense, but I find this of minimal use, particularly since the other areas of the site are unintelligible to an English speaker. I've never deleted the link myself, but I don't really think it needs to be linked here. · Katefan0^(scribble) 17:15, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not anxious about it, but I don't see why deleting a link without even knowing the website. Other absinthe guides? Only one, so there aren't that many links. And the link is directed to the Buyers Guide, wich is in English. Even if it is not the best English. Greetings, Alex

I have gone to the site and it is not useful at all, especially compared to the other resources listed. A buyers guide edited by a single person is far from unbiased considering he sells advertising to online shops. People know about google and can do their own "comparison of prizes"

Please stop adding the link to absinth-guide.de. The consensus here on the talk page is that it does not belong in the article. · Katefan0^(scribble) 14:30, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

Know what? I don't care anymore. If some of you think they know how things are going, I don't want to take away your illusions. By the way, the buyers guide is done by about 10 to 20 different people, not only by me. And last time it wasn't me who added the link. (Alex)

Side Effects

I'm a product of the movies which means I probably believe a lot of myths. I have always thought of absinthe as producing a marijuana like "high". Is this not true? Jaberwocky6669 July 7, 2005 03:33 (UTC)

Try some and find out. ;) Seriously, you might like to visit erowid.com -- they have first-person testimonials about all kinds of drug experiences, including absinthe. · Katefan0^(scribble) July 7, 2005 03:39 (UTC)

Awesome. I used to think of those sites as just talk but since you recommend it I will look at them more closely. Jaberwocky6669 July 7, 2005 04:43 (UTC)

Shrug* Like any other of this sort of banter, your mileage may vary. But it's at least entertaining. · Katefan0^(scribble) July 7, 2005 04:48 (UTC)

The exact effects of absinthe are debatable, and vary, but are pretty much never like a marijuana high. That is a combination of marketing and myth. It is often subtle. Unfortunately some companies push the MJ claims so they can sell low quality booze at high prices. Ari 7 July 2005 06:45 (UTC)

for that matter, MJ experiences can vary WIDELY from person to person. On a personal note, I find the absinthe experience to be comparable to drinking other alcohols, but with a slight 'character' to it. It's not much, imho, sort of like the difference between 'wine drunk' and 'beer drunk,' but maybe it's all placebo. Erowid is at least a good place to at least get an idea. --Morbid-o 7 July 2005 18:43 (UTC)

Banning of absinthe in the USA

There should probably be something about the circumstances leading to absinthe being banned in the USA. As I remember reading, absinthe was never popular in the early 20th century USA, but the administration of William Howard Taft thought that by banning absinthe, the prohibitionist groups such as the Woman's Christian Temperance Union would be appeased enough to the point that they would no longer demand any prohibition of all alcoholic beverages. As it were, this strategy failed spectacularly.

I like the idea, but it would need a source. --Morbid-o 20:28, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Besides, the temperance folks were upset about a slightly different issue - a huge proportion of American men drank large quantities of whiskey on a daily basis, and the banning of absinthe would not have affected this practice. ZacharyS 16:43, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

I did read it in a book about absinthe. This demands more research.

Manufacture. Removed for clarity. In the US it's illegal to run a personal still without the approval from the ATF. Since absinthe is distilled, home manufacture is illegal.Ari 17:52, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Absinthe External Link Hypocrisy Evident by Ari X and Potential Others

I find it very hypocritical that a site like www.absinthebuyersguide.com is left in the resources links.

Why? Because that site is owned and operated by the same man (Mike Schallehn) that runs www.alandia.de, the web store that absinthe buyer's guide was created to send all of its traffic to (eventually, no matter where you go on the "buyer's guide" - you will end up at alandia.de's online shop - coincidence? I think not).

And on top of it, on absinthebuyersguide.com he under-handedly asks for Paypal donations to help cover "bandwidth costs"! (as if he isn't making enough money from the traffic coming from the "buyer guide"!?)

Oxygenee's "virtual absinthe museum" is great for the pictures and info, but once again - all he's doing is using that content to get visitors to buy all of the items he offers there. If it was truly a "museum", all of those items listed on his site would not be for sale now, would they? And they are, as you can see.

My point is that these are commercial links FULL-STOP and I question if you - Ari might even be receiving compensation from any of these vendors you are adamant about keeping on here.

What's fair for one site should be fair for all - each resource link should be held to the same standards.

Unless we come to a consensus on what is considered commercial or acceptable, I will see to it that these links will continue to be edited in a way that proves the hypocrisy in your removal of the link I posted.

Either way, Mike of Alandia.de's "absinthebuyerguide.com" will soon be replaced with another website far more interesting, informative, as well as relevant - and will serve as more than just a picture book linking to the owner's web store. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.161.104.4 (talk • contribs)

Depends on what you intend to replace it with. Please sign your talk page comments with four tildes ~~~~. Also, new comments go at the bottom, not the top. I've moved it for you. · Katefan0^(scribble) 14:38, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

I've revewed your changes. The first policy that comes to mind is don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point, which is exactly what you've done with these past edits. Is it possible to find a commercial link in those links? Yes. But the difference is that there is also independently useful information therein, unlike with the website you have tried to add. Stop pushing this against consensus; your actions are bordering on vandalism. · Katefan0^(scribble) 14:43, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Some interesting information. Before you make accusations you should probably do your research. You should notice oxygenee was linked here before I joined wikipedia. The buyersguide was added by someone else. So, no, I don't make money from those links. I do find the accusations that I am making money a bit funny since your link appeared to contain a ref number that would possibly give you money each time someone bought through it.

Buyersguide-I couldn't find any evidence it is owned by the same person that owns alandia. I've been hesitant of this link since it was first added, but it did seem to contain information. However since it doesn't appear to link to many stores but only alandia (for most of the cases) and since Feeverte is becoming a much better buyersguide, I would vote to remove this guide from Wikipedia.

Oxygenee-Yes, Oxygenee sells antiques and some books and spoons and doesn't sell modern absinthe. The site is also one of the best places for information containing the best FAQ on the net. Many pictures of antiques and translations of old documents. The Oxygenee link could be adjusted to point towards the FAQ, however it shouldn't be removed.

Ari 16:13, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

I've removed the featured article candidate sticker for now. IP 70.106.243.122 placed it here but hasn't done anything else required. I think the article is pretty good but I'm not sure it's up to featured article snuff compared to others. Ari 00:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry if I upset anyone by adding a commercial link (already removed). For the record, Mike does not own the Absinthe Buyers Guide. although he certainly pays for the advertising on the site.

However, given that the owner of the Fee Verte site has a direct financial involvement in the absinthe distribution business now (see http://www.absintheclassics.com/ which is a direct link from the Oxygenee home page), should Wikipedia be giving such preferential treatment to one absinthe distribution business while ignoring all the others? I understand that the Forum can be slightly elitist, but I think that Wikipedia has to be more even-handed.

Alanmoss 12:33, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Alan. I believe I removed the absinthe buyers guide link because it contained no new or useful information and advertising links. I'll have to take a look at it again. Affiliation and involvement are less important than what the specific site contains. For example, if you were to create a site with accurate information about the history of Czech absinth and it didn't contain "buy now" plastered all over it, I think that would be a good addition to the links as well as a possible source for added information for the article. Oxy selling stuff from the main page is the reason the links now go directly to the information. Being the internet I doubt external links can get completely away from commercial tie ins but the idea is to get close while still providing sources for information in the article and pages people can goto to learn more. Ari 18:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Ari, I tend to agree that the Absinthe Buyer's Guide should not be included; it didn't start as a front originally but is much more so now. I wasn't arguing for it to be added - just clarifying the issue.

Alanmoss 19:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

1990's and absinthe

Thanks for the GSP corrections. I removed "many connoisseurs believe" from the section about Hill's because it's not just a belief by connoisseurs. Absinthe is an anise based liquor and Hill's doesn't contain anise. It's only connection with traditional absinthe is that it contains wormwood. Ari 04:36, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Works for me, although I think that should be explained in the article, otherwise it just looks like an unsupported nonsequitur. Thanks! · Katefan0^(scribble) 04:38, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I changed "most people in UK and Europe" to "many people in some European markets." In the UK, French absinthe outsells Bohemian style by a long way, and I think that this is true for much of Western Europe. I also indicated that there are similarities between the two styles, i.e. wormwood and high alcohol content.. Alanmoss 07:28, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Absinthium Dunelm, External links

213.2.69.59 I removed the link because of inaccurate information. I'm sure I look like the link nazi to some but I think it's important that the external links contain accurate and additional information or understanding and keep wikipedia as commercially neutral as possible. This way viewers can find out more about absinthe with a minimum amount of clicking and surfing.

I removed the link because there is some inaccurate information on that site, such as the claim linking thujone with THC. The FAQ seems to be taken from an older La Fee FAQ and there is no new information besides the existence of the absinthium Dunelm group.

If the inaccurate information was removed it might be reasonable to include the absinthium Dunelm group page on the external links, although an explanation by you as to why it should be included would be nice.Ari 09:34, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Kylie Minogue?

Why is there a picture of Kylie Minogue?

I believe it explains in the article she played the green fairy in a recent film so there is a picture of her in the popular culture section. Ari 17:37, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Flavor and Production

Contrary to popular belief, the flavor of absinthe comes primarily from anise, Fennel or star anise and not wormwood.

Although it's sometimes believed that absinthe is created through fermenting wormwood or aged in wormwood casks neither is true. The wormwood is macerated in high proof alcohol and then distilled.

US Importation

"It is probably illegal for someone outside the country to sell such a product to a citizen living in the US." A person is generally not allowed to mail things to a country that are illegal in that country. If it was legal in the country it was sent from this wouldn't be extraditable, but the person might well be unable to travel to the US in the future if they wished to avoid arrest if it were something major (with absinthe I doubt they blacklist people). Absinthe is not regulated as a controlled substance but by the FDA.

There is an important differences between illegal or scheduled items and those banned through FDA regulations. Absinthe is only banned through regulations, which means customs can confiscate bottles brought into the US but most likely wont charge those bringing the bottles in with any offense. The FDA regulation also means that while sales of absinthe is illegal possession and consumption is not.

What about Vermouth

Vermouth is an alcoholic beverage that traditionally uses wormwood as a flavoring, however the current ingredients to most vermouth are not known as they are a secret to the public. At first glance it would seem that vermouth being sold in the US contradicts FDA regulation. Emmert's study on thujone in absinthe also tested for thujone in a brand of vermouth and no thujone was found.[1] It is unknown if this brand uses wormwood, if so it is speculated that the mainly water maceration used wouldn't extract the alcohol soluble thujone. Allowing Vermouth to pass FDA regulations.

Connection to Arak & Ouzo?

There are a number of Mediterranean anise liquors that will also louche but don't traditionally contain the same ingredients. With a number of local recipes it is theoretically possible some Ouzo contains artemesia species but it isn't know. Arak is made with anise and wine spirit only. It is unknown if the medicinal elixir sold to Major Dubied has any historical connection to these spirits.

Links

In keeping with wikipedia's policies it was decided to keep the page as vendor/producer neutral as possible. Eliminating purely commercial links and trying to keep new ones down to a minimum as long as they contain new information not presented in a previous link. It is also important that new links contain accurate information.

Cruise Mystery

Do we really need this here? This is a short-term issue and having it here really shows a lack of any historical perspective. It also plays into the hands of the anti-absinthe community. I don't want to offend anyone by removing it, but really .. Alanmoss 07:23, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia does include current events as well as history and it seems to be big/hyped enough to have 'experts' talking about it on national tv. When/if it blows over I think it can be edited down to a mention instead of a large section. Ari 15:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with Ari x. The section right now seems unduly long, and I just noticed the "Cruise Mystery" subheading, which does focus even more attention, however, "we do stay current" on WP, so it makes sense for right now. If this fades away, I think the only lasting notability and interest is in how that one particular wire service story obviously deliberated reconstructed exactly the old scare using old and current material and quotes, without being technically wrong. So the essence of that story itself would have to be captured in a brief paragraph or two. --Tsavage 15:26, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I added the header as it didn't flow well going right from unbanning in many countries to the mystery. Ari 15:45, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Production at home

Here in Poland we have a beverage called "Piolunowka" (Piolun means wormwood)- you make it almost exactly the same like absinth but you ommit the destillation - you just filter it through coffie filter or bandage after macerating for two weeks in pure alcohol. Some sites compare such process to making wine by adding grape juice to vodka, but it's a huge exagarration. Destillation just make the product clearer and bit less bitter. You can't buy it - It's usually (very very rarely though) made at home. It's the easiest way to expierience the effects and taste of the original Absinthe. I would even say, that it is closer to the absinthe of XIX century than absinthe made today for example Chach Republic. Most of them are artificially coloured and flavoured and contain thujone at levels you really can't feel (10 mg/kg). As a matter of fact I began the proces of making Piolunowka today at home and can supply pictures of the finished product within two weeks. Do you think there is a place for such mention on Absinthe page? Or should I make new article about Piolunowka only linked from Absinthe? - LLothar (llothar at sgk dot info dot pl) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.221.201.206 (talk • contribs) .

A new article would be best as Piolunowka sounds like a wormwood based drink similar to absinth with its own history and not an anise based drink like absinthe. Although the grape to wine analogy is a bit extreme there are very important reasons for distillation that make for a better product, it is one of the reason Czech absinth is often described as tasting horrible. You will also notice as you read the absinthe or thujone article that thujone really doesn't play a role and even vintage absinthe was below the modern regulation levels. Ari 22:43, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree, a new article with a "see also" link from here would probably be best. Interesting topic, though. · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 22:44, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

So be it. When I'll find some time I'll write It (Friday propably). Grammar and spell check from an english native speaker will be greatly appritieated. I'll let you know when the first version will be online. - LLothar

Ok - Piołunówka is now done. LLothar

Absinthe and absinth?

We seem to have two separate articles here - the former describing both the classic drink and its modern revival, and the latter just the modern products. I assume a merge is in order, or are they really distinct things, in which case the articles need some editing to clarify this? — sjorford (talk) 16:46, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

There is a difference... sort of. There are many products called absinth that share very little with absinthe besides the wormwood. They are a different type of drink and are not absinthe. Companies have taken advantage of the fact that there is no legal definition of absinth or absinthe and called their drinks absinth. Then to further add to the confusion, absinth is a valid way of spelling absinthe, the anise based drink. The idea of the other article was to move information about the modern wormwood based drinks into a new page to make this article just about the anise based drink. But with all the name confusion and whatnot I'm not sure how effective that is or will be. So the absinth page may end up getting reabsorbed into the absinthe page unless things can be expanded to make more sense. Ari 17:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I think that most absinthe and absinth drinkers would think that they are very different things and I therefore suggest that they should not be merged. I know Ari has started the work on absinth but it is probably quite a big job.

Alanmoss 16:57, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, I can see the point of having two articles, but I'm concerned that the titles are too ambiguous, as either spelling might be used for either thing. Is that right? — sjorford (talk) 09:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I fail to see the deep difference, and the presence of anisse as mentioned in the absinth article did not convince me. The point is, there are many brands of wormwood-based liqueurs in the market. Some of them I know are relatively low-alcohol (~30%). Also, "Regulations" sections are to a large extent identical. I put a "merge" tag to both articles (although I'm not 100% certain it's the right thing to do, but it might attract some more attention of potential discussers). Duja 09:51, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, instead of merge, the right solution is to rename absinth to e.g. Wormwood liqueur and explain general things about wormwood-based liqueurs, including thujone thingo, regulations, various types and brands (I think Jaegermeister and Unicum might fall into the category), absinth/absinthe dictinction and confusion, and link to Absinthe as the most renown and most infamous type of it. As stated in that article, "absinth" (sans e) is not universally distinguished from "absinthe", and the distinction made there looks speculative/local level to me. Comments? Duja 09:51, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

The taste difference between absinthe and absinth has been likened to the taste difference between whisky and vodka. Absinthe connoisseurs certainly see them as very different. Looking elsewhere on Wikipedia, note that there are separate articles for Scotch, Bourbon and Canadian whiskies: on that basis, it makes sense to me to keep absinthe and absinth as separate articles, keeping the names as they are. There is confusion, agreed, but Wikipedia should be a resource people can turn to in order to eliminate the confusion.

Alanmoss 11:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

OK then, but then I think we should stress the differences in the very introduction sections. I watch few (somewhat related) articles and I find annoying parallel existence of e.g. Pandura and Tambura, and Rakia and Ţuică with repeated information and weakly cross-linked. The general problem is, very similar products are used in different cultures, often with cognate names, and each culture deems it as its own. I see no problem with that per se, but we should develop a general taxonomy for such stuff.

So, I trust your assertion, and I'll remove the merge tag. Yet, I think we should have one (or two) "main" article(s) called Wormwood-based liquor and/or Wormwood-based liqueur and link Absinth, Absinthe, Absente, Piołunówka, Pelinkovac, maybe Jaegermeister and Unicum from there and vice-versa. There, we could explain the regulations (which seem to be common for all similar drinks). What do you think? Duja 12:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

A wormwood based liquors article is an interesting idea. Alan is right the difference is night and day, the only similarity is wormwood and a high proof alcohol base. The name confusion is quite annoying, for a long time many absinthe connoisseurs stuck by the saying "no e let it be" but there have been a few products produced that are anise based, good quality and spelled absinthe. A merge into absinthe may be a good idea as long as the absinthe article isn't getting too long. They are different products but definitely linked as many absinth producers try to pass their product off as the real deal. Ari 16:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

On another note -- you're right about absente, it was created for an American market to appear as if it were absinthe but in fact contains none of the substance that makes it banned here. (hence ... absente) · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 16:19, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely right to remove the pack shot of Absente. For info, they do sell a real absinthe in Europe, but the US product is just expensive pastis, and is a bad attempt to persuade Americans otherwise.

Alanmoss 17:27, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any info about their european version containing Grande wormwood? If so then the box would be a bit more valid. I can't find any information about a grande wormwood european version on their site. FV used to have a review for their european version but it now links to the pastis and I don't remember it giving specific ingredients. On the box the "Liqueur aux plantes D Absinthe" can be valid for either species as both are "wormwood." Ari 17:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm 99% certain that the EU product is real absinthe with AA (to be cross checked and info given to FV if relevant). So technically speaking the photo might have been valid. However given that the majority of people reading Wikipedia in English are likely to have access only to the US version, I think that someone was trying it on, in adding this photo. I can think of many more deserving brands!

Alanmoss 19:29, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I am of the opinion the absinthe and absinth articles should be merged. In fact, this is basically a spelling question (French vs. German spelling), commonly denoting spirit drinks based on wormwood. The single article can make a quite clear distinction between the different styles of the product (e.g. French vs. Czech style), as well as highlighting the historical aspects and the current situation.

LHOON 15:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC) 25 February 2006

I guess the absinth article isn't clear enough. In the case of most absinth they aren't different styles but different products that have different tastes and characteristics, they are named similar because some companies decided to capitalize on the history of absinthe. Both articles might end up together because many people believe there is a link between the two products, however the goal of the second article was to give absinth its own home and not bloat the absinthe page. Ari 17:51, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I've merged the absinth page into absinthe as the "Bohemian absinth" section, because the two products do share such a connection (there is a difference than just spelling) and I think overall things are shorter and easier to understand. Since it should be considered a different product if the absinthe page gets too long and is broken into smaller pages, the Bohemian absinth section should be the first to get its own page. Ari 20:13, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

The merge works very well. Alanmoss 22:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

External Links

I removed the new external link to Absintheonline.com. We need to agree the policy on external links: either we accept that several companies would like to have links here (Absintheonline, La Fee, eAbsinthe, Absinthe Distribution, Alandia, Absinthe 24, etc) or we don't have any external links to suppliers. What do we agree? Alanmoss 12:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I don't think any links to vendors that aren't wiki links to other articles or to sources of information in the article should be allowed on the main absinthe page. Ari 16:17, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

All links in the External Links area have commercial relationships. The Wiki non-biased and neutrality guidelines state that information should not be removed, it should be edited. And that edits should be made in a neutral and un-biased manor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Owl2hagrid (talk • contribs)

Wrong. The guidelines do not say that commercial links can't be removed. The link you are inserting (which, by the way, is the only thing you have ever done on Wikipedia - not a good argument for your case) does not add anything to the article. It has nothing to do with POV - I'm sure most of the editors of this article think Absinthe is pretty kick-ass. But the content of that site is geared not toward actually reviewing the brands, but advertising for them and offering links to buy them. That doesn't fly, and you can request arbitration all you want. Kafziel 16:28, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Although Kafziel removed it for commercial reasons I have removed it because it doesn't provide any new information and has incorrect information. Both are important. The idea of external links is to give readers places they can find more information in a quick manner. So a small group of informative links is better than a large group of links that repeat about the same information or even incorrect information.

Looking over "buyersguide" I couldn't find anything that hasn't been said on another site. The guide itself seems to be a collection of pictures and a sparadic link to a single sponsor for "more information." FeeVerte, the wormwood society and absinthe.se contain more information than that about many brands including reviews. The FAQ and History section appear to be good but don't contain anything that isn't already on Feeverte or Oxygenee. The wormwood article contains incorrect information and for that alone it shouldn't be part of the external links section. (Please see thujone for the correct information).

I would disagree with you that all the current external links have commercial relationships. Oxygenee is the absinthe information site on the internet, the commercial relationship is mainly with vintage absinthe and products, not a market that has much competition. The externals link page goes directly to the museum to put that further into the background. Feeverte lists no sponsors on the site, they do have vendors links given along with a review of the vendor and make no profit from those links. The wormwood society has no commercial relationships beyond selling a couple glasses and spoons in small quantities to keep the forum costs down. Absinthe.se has no sponsor links. All of these sites provide new information or services as well.

I would agree Kafziel, the buyersguide is either not yet complete (in which case we should be talking about this when it is) or is mainly a site to sponsor Alandia.

those are my reasons for not including it in external links. Ari 16:46, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

In other words, the only sites that will be allowed in the External Links area are those who have close working relations with each other, prohibiting and excluding all others. How do we reach a compromise? Why should one guide with one viewpoint be allow, while another with different points of view be discriminated against.

What is this "viewpoint" you keep talking about? What point of view is expressed on your website that is different than the others? Kafziel 17:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Nope I did not say that, please re-read my reply.Ari 17:12, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Kafziel, my viewpoint is that no single guide has the definitive answer. The guide that I listed provides information about 95% of the different modern products produced around the world by a variety of different manufacturers.

So what you're saying is that after all this "NPOV" nonsense, what you really mean is that it's your point of view that this site is better than the others. Well, too bad. The point of view of one person (or even several) is not protected by the WP:NPOV policy. I suggest you read it again, particularly the part about undue weight where it says:

If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it doesn't belong in Wikipedia (except perhaps in some ancillary article) regardless of whether it's true or not; and regardless of whether you can prove it or not.

All your "guide" does is redirect readers to the same sales website no matter what they click on. Pretty transparent. None of the reviews say, "Boy, this brand sucks," which is always a simple clue that the "review" site is really just a gateway to a commercial site. It stays out. Kafziel 17:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Note, to sign your posts end them with four ~

Can you please post a link to that page I can't find much actual information just images.Ari 17:27, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Liquor or Liqueur

There seems to be some confusion about this. Although absinthe seems to fit as a liqueur it is not pre sweetened like a liqueur and thus betters fits the general liquor category. Making it different from many other anise flavored drinks which are pre sweetened.Ari 16:05, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

A liqueur MUST have sugar in it: it must contain at least 2.5% sugar by weight. I do not believe that absinthe traditionally had sugar; some absinthes (eg Versinthe) does, but not to this level. I'll get the technical story on this but I think that there should not be any confusion, except for Americans who talk about liquors and liqueurs as if they are the same. They are not. Alanmoss 16:31, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, now. People complain about Americans generalizing -- can we back away from blanket statements? Signed, an informed American ;) · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 17:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

It may be that some Americans use liquor and liqueur interchangeably, but not all of them do. I've researched alcoholic beverages recently, both on line and in print, and I found out that the most common meaning for liquor is spirits and liqueurs. As for the difference between a spirit and a liqueur, there are two main considerations:

the amount of sugar: spirits are dry (no sugar), while liqueurs are sweet.
the source of alcohol: spirits get their alcohol from the process of distillation, while liqueurs get their alcohol from one of the ingredients in their receipt. In other words, liqueurs are made with spirits.

That being said, I cannot object to the assertion that "absinthe is a liquor", because it is, but I think "absinthe is a liqueur" is more precise, and should be preferred. You can also check the definition of absinthe at a number of on line dictionaries: http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861583097 http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=absinthe http://www.bartleby.com/61/61/A0026100.html and others. Dmaftei 17:37, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

It is similar because it is an herbal drink made with a base alcohol however it isn't sugared and so it doesn't match the definition of a liqueur. Both of those linked definitions also mention it being toxic so I'm not sure they are entirely accurate. Ari 18:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Ari.

Sorry for my generalisation above. It has been my experience having worked in the liquor trade for more than 15 years that it is mainly in America that this confusion exists. In the UK (and other countries in Europe), the word liquor is very rarely used.

Re: absinthe is a liqueur: read the first few words in the WP article on liqueurs: "A liqueur is a sweet alcoholic beverage." One of the defining characteristics of absinthe as it comes out of the bottle is its bitterness: it is so bitter that many consumers add sugar. And in my experience (I run an absinthe business, selling over 50 brands), it is uncommon for absinthes to contain any sugar, let alone the legal limit I quoted above for a drink to be a liqueur. Finally if you read the section in FeeVerte (see the links on the WP article) on historical absinthe, you will not see sugar listed in the ingredients. A few absinthes may contain sugar nowadays (not up to the correct amount in my experience), but that doesn't mean that all absinthe does, and it does not mean that absinthe is a liqueur. Alanmoss 18:52, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Alan, it's okay. I was only teasing, I wasn't really offended. This discussion has been very interesting so far and I've enjoyed reading it. Since some absinthes now have added sugar, wouldn't it be more appropriate to simply say that? That generally absinthe isn't considered a liqueur, however, some manufacturers do add sugar? It doesn't need to be mentioned prominently, but one line somewhere wouldn't hurt. Probably don't need anything like a category describing it as liqueur, though. · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 19:05, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, I suppose the WP definition "A liqueur is a sweet alcoholic beverage." can be objected to... I have no reason to not believe you, Alanmoss, but I'm looking at "The Complete Book of Spirits : A Guide to Their History, Production, and Enjoyment" and "Complete Guide to Spirits and Liqueurs", and they both clasify absinthe as liqueur. And I have no reason to not believe these two authors either :-) Now, I know that the demarcation between spirits and liqueurs is not clear cut, but if we agree that liquor means spirits and liqueurs, and we agree that absinthe is a liquor, then absinthe must be either a spirit, or a liqueur. Would you clasify it as a spirit? Dmaftei 19:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Is there any kind of international standard-setting body for alcohol? · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 19:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

It's certainly valid to go through all this, and I will be happy to talk to some other industry experts to see if I can get anything official. Interesting to note that the French Wikipedia quotes the same definition for liqueur that I do, and then goes onto put absinthe into liqueurs too (as does the Encyclopedia Britannica). From my time working on Cointreau (definitely a liqueur), I recall definite standards for liqueurs, but these may have been European, rather than global. Would I call absinthe a spirit, rather than a liqueur? Yes .. and the French label it as "Spritueux" in France (meaning spirit). I'll see what official papers I can get in the next few days. Alanmoss 22:19, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Apologies for not reading this talk page first but dictionary.com has 4 reputable dictionarys listing liqueur and if the encyclopedia britannica and other printed sources all say liqueur then liqueur it is. Saying otherwise would be original research, even if you are technically correct you'd have to get the encyclopedia brittanica and other printed sources to change their definitions first. WP is not a primary source. Discordance 20:23, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with saying that it could be classified in different ways based on different definitions. · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 20:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it would be original research that say that based on current information the dictionaries were wrong. This article does that a number of times as many dictionary call absinthe toxic and prohibited in many countries.

reasons why I don't see it as a liqueur,

The definition of liqueur is complicated but one thing that seems to be agreed upon is that liqueur contains sugar and was traditionally served after dinner. Traditional absinthe and the majority of modern absinthe do not contain sugar. It was traditional to drink absinthe as an apéritif before dinner, so much so 5 pm was called the "green hour."
I think the dictionaries got confused, liqueur is both the name of a type of drink and french for Liquor. So when the french called absinthe a liqueur the dictionaries assumed it was the type of drink and didn't need to be translated.

Ari 21:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

As you know already, Ari and I agree 100% on this (I think!). To be consistent, and if we can persuade others that we are right and Encyclopedia Britannica etc are wrong, we should change liqueur everywhere it appears in the article currently. To spirit? Views? Alanmoss 21:29, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

with the exception of the lead defining absinthe all other uses of liqueur on this page are talking about other liqueurs and not absinthe, so no changing everything to spirits is a very bad idea. Discordance 21:44, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

It has historically been classified as a liqueur by many sources, it would be historically inaccurate to write that out of the article because regulatory bodies are changing the definitions. Btw not sure if anyone noticed I changed the lead a few days ago to read liquor->liqueur because liquor doesnt clarify anything but I have no problems with the lead saying something like "typically classified as a liqueur however some modern definations regard it as a spirit due to its low sugar content". A quick search on google shows the australians stuggling to define liqueur at least [2] under their old definition absinthe is a liqueur but they are rethinking things. Anyway im reasonably happy then that some regulatory bodies may consider it a spirit, I would like sources though. And finally if it has dual-classification it belongs in the liqueur cat any spirits cat. Discordance 21:34, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

As long as there are valid sources that clasify it as a liqueur (dictionaries, books), and valid sources that clasify it as a non-liqueur (legislation), the only sensible thing to do is to add both definitions in the article, as Discordance suggested. Dmaftei 22:02, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Do you (Discordance) have any links to sources that explain why they traditionally classify it as a liqueur?

Dictionary.com, which you are using as a valid source, defines liqueur as being sweet and drank after-dinner. Neither applies to absinthe, thus there is a major contradiction here. We get another contradiction when we look at the Columbia encyclopedia for liqueur which defines it as sweet (among other things) and drank after dinner. The Crystal Reference Encyclopedia continues this contradiction in their definition of liqueur. The contradiction also continues in wikipedia's definition of liqueur.

It would seem to me the dictionaries listed the french word for Liquor in their absinthe definition. Since you are using similar dictionaries and encyclopedia's as your reference I don't think you can deny, based on their definition of liqueur absinthe is not a liqueur. Ari 22:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Try searching for absinthe on dictionary.com all 4 entries clearly say liqueur[3]... another user previously mentioned brittanica does[4]. The australian govenerment[5] did until maybe recently (later than 2002). Encarta [6]. Bartleby [7]. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary[8]. Regardless of whether you think theyre wrong clearly it has been considered a liqueur even if by mistake.

And in fact searching for liqueur on dictionary.com 2/4 definations place absinthe as a liqueur. definition two says usually sweetened. definition 4 says Others are distilled from aromatic or flavoring agents. Wikis liqueur page later down the page clarifies some liqueurs are not sweetened. Encarta: usually sweetened [9]. Discordance 22:59, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I do have a source concerning the new definition of liqueur in Europe Council Regulation (EEC) No 1576/89 of 29 May 1989 laying down general rules on the definition, description and presentation of spirit drinks under this EEC regulation to be labelled as a liqueur a drink must have a minimum of 100g sugar per litre. So perhaps yes the lead should read 'under modern regulations absinthe is classified as a spirit due to its low sugar content, however it has historically been considered a liqueur." And it still needs to be in the spirit and liqueur cat. Discordance 23:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I feel like we are going in circles so I may ask an administrator such as Kate to make a final decision if we can't come to a consensus.

You have yet to provide a source that shows why absinthe is historically a liqueur. Absinthe was popular in france and liqueur in french means liquor. This is further shown by the fact that 0/4 liqueur definitions at dictionary.com match absinthe (it is not sweetened and was not traditionally drank after a meal, each definition suggests at least one of those) nor does absinthe match the encyclopedia (including wikipedia) definitions of liqueur.

did you even read my reponse or re-read those definitions? Discordance 00:01, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

If absinthe doesn't match any definition of liqueur and if liqueur was used in france because it means "liquor" then I think we can say the dictionaries definition of absinthe is wrong.

The australian government changed their definition because they realized technically vodka (among other drinks) could be considered a liqueur, " If so interpreted, the definition could also be extended to the mixing of spirits with water (as a food) to supply low strength spirits under the name ‘liqueur’" so I don't see that as a reason to follow the same mistake and call absinthe a liqueur.

On a side note it worries me that if we must add liqueur just because the dictionary says so, even though we know it's incorrect does that also mean we need to add "absinthe is toxic" and "absinthe is banned in most countries" to the article even though we know those are incorrect too? Ari 23:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

As for a historic source considering it a liqueur I edited the article reasonably including a link to the 1911 britannica which this article is sourced from which admittedly says liqueur or spirit so i made another concession and said it was historically ambiguous. I hope you can be reasonable and accept the changes. Discordance 00:01, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes I did read what you said and the definitions given and the 1911 article this page started with, but I'm not sure you understand what I'm asking. To clarify I was asking for a source that explained Why they called it a liqueur. So far all I can see are a number of dictionary definitions that call it a liqueur even though it contradicts their definition of liqueur (same goes for the 1911 article). That suggests either their liqueur definition or their absinthe definition is wrong. Based on what I've already posted I would say it is the absinthe definition and the contradiction that absinthe is a liqueur even though it doesn't meet the definition of a liqueur shouldn't be on the page.Ari 00:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

No offense, Ari, but what you're asking is ridiculous... WP's verifiability policy requires a source for a claim, not a source that verifies the source for a claim. It also requires that a claim is verifiable, and not necessarily true, so even if you are right about absinthe not being a liqueur, the fact that there are verifiable sources that categorize absinthe as liqueur warrants the inclusion of the alternate definition in the article. Dmaftei 01:00, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't think we should add something just because it was said in the past. Since it appears calling absinthe a liqueur is a mistake the only way it should be added is to say absinthe was mistakenly called a liqueur in the past. It should not be added as a statement that is or was true without verifacation of that truth especially since absinthe doesn't match the old or the current definition of liqueur.Ari 01:13, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

It is being said now. I don't have Encyclopedia Britannica or Merriam-Webster in print, but I bet what they put online is no older than a few years at most. And the books I mentioned at the beginning of this discussion are recent, not a hundred years old. As for the truth, please review Wikipedia:Verifiability: The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. This means that we only publish material that is verifiable with reference to reliable, published sources. Note the emphasis on verifiability, not truth. Dmaftei 01:31, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry ari but 2 of the definitions you provided said nothing about drinking after dinner. Neither requires that a liqueur is sweetened they have exceptions in the definition, one of the two said "usually sweetened". The other said "Others are distilled from aromatic or flavoring agents". I really want to know how either of those definitions exclude absinthe? Definitions evolve, that doesnt retroactively make credible sources in the past wrong. Discordance 01:40, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Dmaftei: The statement "Absinthe has been mistakenly called liqueur in the past" seems to have been verified, thus it should be included. Can you verify the statement "Absinthe has been correctly called liqueur in the past"? If not then if liqueur is included the first statement matches wikipedias verification.

Discordance: Ok the final time here with quotes. Dictionary.com's definition of liqueur, 1) "Any of various strongly flavored alcoholic beverages typically served in small quantities after dinner." Not absinthe and not a very good definition. 2) "a usually sweetened alcoholic beverage variously flavored (as with fruit or aromatics)" Absinthe is very rarely sweetened and shouldn't be. However I admit it does seem to catch absinthe using the word "usually" however that also means liquors such as Gin are really liqueurs. This contradicts dictionary.com calling Gin a liquor. 3) "strong highly flavored sweet liquor usually drunk after a meal" not absinthe. 4) similar to #2, same response.

There are zero definitions of liqueur that solidly fit absinthe and a couple that when taken with exceptions don't just encompass absinthe but also other beverages that are commonly considered liquor, thus it seems a strain to use those exceptions to call absinthe a liqueur yet to still call other beverages that fit the exception, like gin, a liquor. Ari 02:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I take your point that it could in theory apply to things like flavoured vodkas which are not considered liqueurs and government regulations had to change the definition because such things were being sold as liqueur which was misleading. However you have no idea what definition of liqueur these sources were holding themselves to and their reasoning for calling it a liqueur, at the time it wasnt wrong to call it a liqueur according to many reputable sources. Discordance 02:50, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually heres the 1911 definition "LIQUEURS , the general term applied to perfumed or flavoured potable spirits, sweetened by the addition of sugar. The term " liqueur " is also used for certain wines and unsweetened spirits of very superior quality, or remarkable for their bouquet, such as tokay or fine old brandy or whisky."[10]. So yes there is a bit of confusion with the term liquor however it seems it was in general usage as a term for a high quality spirit. The article does go on to suggest absinthe is not a liqueur 'proper' but would still be commonly referred to one and not incorrectly as it was an accepted common usage. Discordance 03:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Based on that definition of liqueur absinthe is not a liqueur. As absinthe in general is not A)sweetened or B) of very superior quality. There are a couple products like Pernod's top brands that would be considered very superior quality and might fit that definition but in general absinthe had both low and mid quality products. So calling absinthe in general a liqueur doesn't match the 1911 definition. I still think it is quite plausible they looked at a product that was labeled "absinthe liqueur (french for liquor)" and called it a liqueur. That would fix all the contradictions.Ari 03:54, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Ari, I don't have to verify the statement "Absinthe has been correctly called liqueur in the past" at all. All I have to do is provide a verifiable source (preferably reputable), that claims "absinthe is a liqueur". The fact that whatever the source claims might not be true is irrelevant as far as WP is concerned. Now, Brittanica, for instance, is reputable, and does claim that absinthe is a liqueur. That's all we need! Look, I'm not saying that you and Alanmoss are wrong, as a matter of fact you guys made it quite clear that you're (probably) right. But that's not the point! The point is that, even if they're wrong, there are reputable, verifiable sources that claim that absinthe is a liqueur, and that should be included in the article. What you're doing here looks a lot like a crusade for truth (and I mean that in a good sense); unfortunately WP is not the proper battlefield for such a crusade... Dmaftei 02:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Just because a source is reputable doesn't mean it's correct all the times or that it should be included, especially when it contradicts itself. A couple reputable sources also say absinthe is toxic beyond the alcohol and that it's prohibited in most countries, both untrue but should we include these incorrect statements in the article just becuase an old source said them?Ari 03:54, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Geez, man, what does it take to make you stop referring to correctness all the time? And yes, the bits about toxicity and prohibition should be included, why shouldn't they?! And please don't say "cause they're no correct", I've had too much of that already, try to come up with an argument that fits in with the WP policies. Dmaftei 14:08, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure you are understanding the point of verifiability not truth. It doesn't mean we should throw any and all verifiable material into the article. It's verifiable the 1911 encyclopedia is wrong, thus if it's information must be included we can also include the fact that it was wrong. I don't think the point of verifiability was so we can blindly trust and copy the 1911. Ari 15:32, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

How exactly is it verifiable that the 1911 encyclopedia is wrong? Can you point us to a verifiable source that states "the liqueur definition in the 1911 edition of Encyclopedia Brittanica is wrong"? Besides, there are other contemporary verifiable sources (books, dictionaries) that, according to you, got it wrong. Can you produce verifiable sources that state that all of these are wrong? That's the point of verifiability. As long as you cannot produce verifiable sources to back up your claim, your assertion that "X is wrong" -- even if you are right -- is original research. And why are we talking about liqueur? Shouldn't we be talking abouth absinthe? Dmaftei 16:14, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to Oxygenee (and Artemis). Duplais' 1882 book, "Traite de la Fabrication de Liqueurs et de la Distillation des Alcools" (1882 3rd Ed) has separate chapters on Liqueurs eaux de vie and absinthe. In the Liqueur chapter it says, "Toutes les liqueurs, sans exception, sont composees d'alcool, de sucre, d'eau commune et d'un parfum ou arome extrait de diverses substances...." Roughly translated. All liqueur, without exception, must contain alcohol, sugar, water and aroma extract. Since absinthe does not contain sugar and is even listed in a different chapter than liqueurs I think it's safe to say it was not considered a liqueur. Ari 02:32, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Since when was Duplais a definitive authority on the matter? At the moment though i dont have anything to contradict it, I just dont think it makes a definitive source that liqueur has always been incorrect. If you changed the sentence a little to say something like "under common usage (including dictionarys? although they report common usage not correct definitions) it has been incorrectly called a liqueur", id be relatively happy. Discordance 09:22, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps a note that the confusion most likely stems from similar anise liqueurs including some sugary modern absinthes compared to the traditional bitter absinthe? Perhaps the way in which it was served with sugar? Just ideas I think maybe they are worth mentioning to help clarify why liqueur is wrong but why some people thought it was one. Discordance 09:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

When it comes to absinthe, or french alcohol in the 19th century Duplais is a much more definitive authority than the 1911 encyclopedia or the general dictionary. The confusion could not stem from the few modern sugared absinthe as the 1911 repeats the confusion and the definition is based on production not how the drink is served. I think clarification of why it is not a liqueur is a good idea. Ari 15:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Oops i meant modern absinthes probably further the confusion, and that it probably stems from anise liqueurs and i know the definition is about the production and not serving, what im saying is the average person in a bar might know vaguely liqueurs are sugary alcohols and might not realise the distinction between production and serving and just assume that because theyre drinking it with sugar it makes it a liqueur, vaguely speaking you could put sugar in a bottle of absinthe and sell it on as a liqueur but it wouldnt be absinthe anymore. What im saying strays a little into original research but it would help to offer some reasons why people mistakenly thought it was a liqueur. Discordance 16:53, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not trying to stir up this mess more, but I don't see how Absinthe is not a liqueur. Granted, I have never tried real Absinthe before, but I do enjoy pastis in cocktails (I use Herbsaint). What seems strange to me is that no one seems to argue that things like Green Chartreuse and Campari are liqueurs, and perhaps things like Strega, Sambuca, etc, though I don't have firsthand experience with those. So lets argue for a moment that Campari falls into a separate category or subcategory of aperitif (and I really don't know squat about it's sugar content). Chartreuse is without a doubt a liqueur by any definition I've ever heard, and in fact it says so on the bottle, though no one would call it sweet. I have read that Chartreuse is conceptually most similar to Absinthe, since pastis is lower proof and/or slightly sweetened. So it seems to me that if Chartreuse is a liqueur, and by all accounts it is, then Absinthe must be one too. The other case for Absinthe being a liqueur is this, unless I am mistaken about the manufacturing process: A liquor or spirit is the distillation of a fermentation (wine => brandy, beer => whiskey, etc) whereas a liqueur is a distillation that has been flavored with fruit, herbs, or whatever. If I were to speculate, I would say that Absinthe probably starts with neutral grain spirits or something similar and then is introduced to the herbs by maceration. Sweetening would not greatly benefit the complex flavoring since sugar has a tendency to hide flavors. However if the Absinthe did not come out of the still (or aging barrel or blending vat) tasting like that, then I don't see how it is anything but a liqueur, legal definitions notwithstanding. If anyone buys any of this I can go hunt down sources, I'm pretty confident in my ablity to back this up ;) --ThirtyOneKnots 18:55, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Because absinthe doesn't have sugar added, all the things you listed do and so does a liqueur. I would call Chartreuse sweet and I know many others that would as well. Both green and yellow have sugar added to them and differ from the original higher proof elixir. After using a bottle for awhile, the white crunchy stuff under the cap, that's mainly dried sugar. In classification absinthe is closer to Gin, which is always called a liquor. Instead of guessing you can always read the wikipedia article about how absinthe is made. A a high proof spirit (sometimes neutral grain, other-times a grape spirit) is mixed with herbs then distilled, the distillate is bottled for a blanche or macerated with more herbs for a verte. Ari 19:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I actually discovered that information immidiately after writing this...oops. Is there any source that can confirm the sugar level in absinthe? Many people classify Bourbons and Canadian Whiskys as sweet, though no sugar is added to them (my opinion is that they are at least sweeter than their Old World relatives). I do find the gin comparison rather compelling, but it seems that until there is a source comparing the sugar levels in gin, et al. and absinthe, OR until I get to try the real thing for myself, I'd have to go with conventional wisdom that absinthe is a liqueur, though it seems that flavored vodkas would have at least as good of a claim on that label (spirits flavored and slightly sweetened). --ThirtyOneKnots 20:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Just to throw my 2 cents in, I agree with Ari's statement that it's closer to gin than any of those other things. Like horrible, horrible gin. ;)

I'm not a big absinthe expert, but the kind I have is definitely not a liqueur. Kafziel 20:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

For vintage absinthe a number of manuals and recipes exist, such as Duplais' writings. In them we can see no sugar was used. There can be some sweetness in an absinthe which is mainly produced by the herbs (such as fennel which can have a licorice candy taste). There are a number of distilleries that are producing their absinthe based on these old recipes. Of the old recipes I've seen there is one that includes sugar and it's specifically called a Creme instead of an extrait d'. With modern products they will list if sugar is added and a couple distilleries actually make a note that sugar wasn't added (since it is added in pastis, a reminder their absinthe might be bitter compared to their pastis is a good idea). There are a couple (one possibly two) bottles that do use a bit of sugar but they are the exception. Oh and speaking of Duplais (If you haven't read through the huge jumble of the talk page yet) it's interesting to note in the book cited he covers liqueurs and absinthe in whole different chapters. Ari 21:07, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Serving Link

I have added an external link to a page showing how French-style absinthe should be served. This page has been stripped of all normal commercial messages, so I hope that other editors agree that it is a useful link (people need educating into how to prepare absinthe) without being overly commercial. Alanmoss 16:47, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Note to unidentifed user: 83.39.253.37. I saw that you removed this link. This is a special page created just for Wikipedia that is free of the normal promotional messages, specifically so that we should show the serving method. I think many of us who drink absinthe recognise the need for education. If you have a better way of doing this, then I am sure the community would like to see it! Alanmoss 12:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

US images

I'm not sure why the image of the decanter in the United States section was replaced with a poster from Switzerland, but I've switched it back. The poster has nothing to do with the U.S., and the decanter photo is the only one in the whole article that actually shows what absinthe looks like (as opposed to paintings, labels on bottles, etc). Kafziel 19:10, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

The Swiss image is quite nice though, so I replaced it adjacent to the Switzerland paragraph, and left your fine decanter shot too adjacent to the US paragraph. LHOON 20:01, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Looks good, and makes much more sense. Kafziel 20:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Considering the bright green glow my guess would be it's artificially colored and not exactly what absinthe looks like. I replaced it with the swiss poster critizing the ban in the regulations section because although the US isn't Switzerland they are one of the few countries that still bans absinthe, so I figured an antique poster critizing the ban was more appropriate than a nice looking but non descript bottle of artificially colored absinthe. Ari 01:58, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know to comment on "authentic" coloring, but it does looks like a glo-stick poured into a...decanter. And the image isn't very good, like a prize snapshot from someone's den. --Tsavage 02:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

It's not artificially colored. I think the extreme color and the fuzziness are due to the crystal decanter. It was hard to get the lighting and flash right without washing it out (which is also why I had to move it from my bar to a shelf on a hutch). I just figured it would be good to have at least one shot of actual absinthe, rather than the 100th foreign art poster or impressionist painting. I might see if I can improve the lighting and/or put it into a different container to get a more natural look and upload a new version. I'm a beer and whiskey man myself, so this isn't the most important topic to me, and if anyone else can take a better photo of some absinthe in a glass (without sugar) they can feel free to replace this one and save me the trouble. Kafziel 05:22, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

The crystal decanter probably did bounce the light around quite a bit. What brand it is (I'm going to take a stab and say Jade, probably Ed, as there are few naturally colored commercial vertes with any real green color too them). Having a picture of absinthe is probably a good idea, I may get around to taking one (don't quote me on that). Ari 05:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

External Links Discussions

I would like to begin a discussion regarding the current sites listed in the External Links area of the Absinthe page.

Why we are here. On March 22, I discovered the Wikipedia Absinthe - External Links page. It currently lists five sites that offer links and information about commercial absinthe products. In fact, all five site listed are known to have close business relationships, share common links and promote common products.

On March 22, I added an external link to a site that provides information about absinthe. It is a site that has some similarities to the other sites yet it also provides a more complete list of the different products being produced around the world.

In my opinion, it is not the content that is in question. What is in question is whether or not sites with ties to commercial products are allowed. And if they are allowed, then my entry should be permitted, as well as others. If not, then all the sites currently listed should be removed.

I would like to point out that giving a web site a fancy name that includes words like "organization", "society", and "museum" that promotes products and offers links to commercial sites is no different than a site that send links to a sponsor's site. In fact, I think that it is more reputable to have links to an acknowledged sponsor's site, then to hide behind fancy names that could be considered misleading. Especially when the current listed sites have close business relationships.

In closing, I want to acknowlege that I find no fault in web sites working together and having business relationships. I do find fault when they work together to censor and restrict others from expressing a different opinion in this type of format.

I open the floor up for comments:

I don't see anything wrong with sites having business relationships or having user reviews and recommendations.

I don't think a list with no other information is very useful. Currently the buyersguide contains only pictures and a recommendation to visit their sponsor to learn more. Which breaks down to empty advertising.

Ties to commercial products are allowed, it's blatant sponsorship especially with no useful information that is a problem.

There is a very big difference between recommendations and sponsorship. Feeverte, wormwood society, absinthe.se make NO money on their recommendations and provide reviews about the products. Oxygenee does make money (I think) on the commercial product he is linked to which is not sponsored on the Museum page (part of the reason for linking to it and not the main site). Sorry but there is a very big difference between those and the buyersguide. To further kill the idea of a conspiracy, ALL commercial products have been openly criticized on both Feeverte and the Wormwood society with no censorship.

None of these groups have done anything to restrict others from expressing a different opinion especially on wikipedia. Although I am a forum member I am not afiliated with any sites and make no money from any of them. Kafziel is an even more unbiased wikipedia member.

I posted further explanation on your (Owl2hagrid) talk page, if you want I can copy it here too. Ari 03:30, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

GA

Outstanding work. Keep improving it and let me know when it comes up for featured status. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 04:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Louche or louché

Have just come back to the site to see multiple uses of "louché," instead of "louche." As an absinthe salesman and a French scholar, I have never heard this word before. In French, such a word would be pronounced "louchay." It's wrong! As further evidence, try a google site search of absintheonline.com or eabsinthe.com Lots of references to "louche;" none to "louché." Any objections to changing all these uses of "louché" back to "louche?" Alanmoss 02:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Ha, ok, then change it back (or I will) I saw louché somewhere and in the article so I thought I would make them all the same. Any other french oddities you see, feel free to correct.Ari 02:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, I've also only seen it without the accent. · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 02:28, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I noticed I still had the text file up, so find and replace all made quick work of that demonic slash. :) Ari 02:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

What do y'all think...

....about an art and literature section? Lots of absintheurs, historically, were creative sorts. I've got an entire book about absinthe in art in particular. I think the article would be greatly enhanced by some sort of look at absinthe as it relates to art and literature. I'll have to look into putting something together. · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 02:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

There is an art and literature section which I just added a little bit too, but it's quite sparse. I think a much improved section would be great. Ari 02:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Timeline

I do agree with Ari's comments that the timeline proposed from the Sebor site is quite sparse. This one is probably more detailed:-

http://www.eabsinthe.com/absinthe-the-absinthe-story.htm

but I do not necessarily propose it as an alternative (also too many commercial messages!). Alanmoss 19:51, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Commercial links redux

Although external links may be owned or run by people who have commercial affiliation that does not mean the links themselves are commercial. The goal of the external links section is to provide the user with sites they can visit to gain more information and these sites should be kept as noncommercial as possible, however that doesn't mean those running them can't have commercial affiliations. A distinction should also be made between a site recommending a product or vendor (such as providing product reviews) and sponsoring a product or vendor and making money from that sponsorship.

Thujone content

Many papers and books list extremely high amounts of thujone such as this article compared to the low, often <10 mg/kg listed in the wikipedia article. Older numbers were based on old detection methods and estimations that the assumed thujone content of wormwood ended up in the final product. Some authors stated these were only estimates but as the figures were repeated those statements were often lost. Current numbers in this article are based on GCMS figures, a gold standard in forensics.

Effects of absinthe on people

Little to no modern research has been done documenting excess amounts of absinthe or exposure to thujone levels in absinthe over a long period of time. However the majority of herbs used in absinthe are common herbs that haven't shown any dangers from low dose exposure. Wormwood is one of the few herbs used that isn't commonly consumed. Its most famous chemical, thujone, "is a rapid-acting and readily detoxified modulator of the GABA-gated chloride channel." [11] So while direct studies have not been done, there is no reason to believe absinthe is any more dangerous than other alcoholic drinks.

Liqueur vs. Liquor

Is absinthe classified as a Liqueur or a Liquor?

Liqueur

Dictionary's such as MSN Encarta: Absinthe call absinthe a liqueur, so do Marriam Webster: Absinthe and The American Heritage: Absinthe
The 1911 Encyclopedia also lists absinthe as a liqueur.
The dictionary definition of Liqueur doesn't always require it to be sweetened.
Liquors are distilled from a fermentations where as Liqueurs are herbs or flavors added to a base alcohol.

Liquor

Liqueurs contain sugar added during production where as absinthe does not.
Modern european regulations require liqueurs to contain 100g sugar per litre.
Duplais' 1882 book, "Traite de la Fabrication de Liqueurs et de la Distillation des Alcools" (1882 3rd Ed) an authoritative source on absinthe and french spirits in the 19th century, has separate chapters on Liqueurs, eaux de vie and absinthe. In the Liqueur chapter it states, "Toutes les liqueurs, sans exception, sont composees d'alcool, de sucre, d'eau commune et d'un parfum ou arome extrait de diverses substances...." Roughly translated. All liqueur, without exception, must contain alcohol, sugar, water and aroma extract.
Gin is similar to absinthe production-wise but is consistently considered a liquor.

Consensus

Consensus was reached that absinthe is a liquor with the possible exception of a few modern products that contained added sugar, although they don't contain enough to meet european regulations they do meet more lenient definitions of a liqueur.

Bohemian bottle image

I'm hesitant to have an image of a single product on the main absinthe page, as the page has been targeted in the past by vendors and general arguments and I would like to keep everything as vendor/product neutral as possible. Although an image of the original design Eiffel tower bottle style of "Hills" might be appropriate as it is basically what started the modern revival. The la fee bohemian bottle might be better on the La Fée Absinthe page. -- Ari 01:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it shouldn't be here. There are enough other photos of absinthe on the page; this photo is copyrighted, and it's a bit of stretch to call it "fair use" when it's not really needed. Kafziel 03:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Czech absinthe

From the article: Often called Bohemian-style, Czech-style, anise-free absinthe or just absinth (without the 'e'), bohemian absinth is produced mainly in the Czech republic where it gets its Bohemian moniker. It doesn't contain anise, fennel or many of the other herbs normally found in the more traditional absinthes produced in countries such as France and Switzerland, and can be extremely bitter. Often the only similarity with its French and Swiss counterparts is the use of wormwood and a high alcohol content, and for all intents and purposes it should be considered a completely different product. In most cases, Czech- or Bohemian-style absinths are not distilled spirits, but rather high-proof alcohol or vodka which has been cold-mixed with herbal extracts and artificial colouring.

The above statements about Czech absinthe are not completely correct. First, there is a misconception about the missing “e”, in both German and Czech in regards to the word absinthe. In both Czech and German it is spelled without an “e” at the end and this has nothing to do with the amount of anise contained in the product, it is a language issue and nothing more. It is also a misconception that all Czech Absinth is without anise; there are several that contain anise such as “Absinth Toulouse Lautrec” which is winning over Absinthe enthusiasts all over the world and debunking the myth of Czech absinthe as being nothing more then cleverly marketed mouthwash. Last but not least it is indeed distilled and it also louches. Before posting dis-information it would be wise to do your homework. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.166.10.96 (talk • contribs)

If you notice the "e" issue is discussed quickly in the etymology section. Although the article doesn't say all czech products are 'bohemian style' you are right that it doesn't mention the czech republic does produce some non bohemian absinthe I will add that with the next update. -- Ari 03:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

All current evidence suggests bohemian-style absinth is a modern product originating in the 1990s.

Provided "bohemian-style absinth" is the liquor I know as "zelená" ("green"), I can assure you we drank it in 1980s (I still remember the occasion because I drank way too much :-) ) and it wasn't a novelty then. Whether the recipe has been preserved from 1920s is, of course, anyone's guess, but I don't believe it should be called "modern"... 89.102.137.101 06:46, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

If you have any literature from the time listing it as "absinth" The majority of bohemian style absinth are much closer to high proof bitters than absinthe. In the bitters form I'm pretty sure similar products have been drank for quite awhile. However the first time it was called "absinth" appears to be in the 90s by the Hills company. A quick search suggests Zelená Muza is a company name which most likely has a number of products. -- Ari 07:30, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

No, and I really don't think it's been called absinth much (if at all). I think it's actually quite simple: absinthe has been drunk in Czech lands in the first half of the 20th century like in the rest of Europe (there's a Czech painting, "The Absinthe Drinker", made reportedly sometime around 1900 - see http://www.reflex.cz/images/imgdb/original/phpIjwXVQ.jpg), using recipes about which not much is known (basically the result was green and had high alcohol content :-) ). During WWII German occupation of Czech lands, producers stopped branding it as absinthe because of its French associations; some production might have continued, or not - it would be a fun history project to find out, but again, I don't have any Wikipedia-quality references and I doubt there are any. After the war, communists didn't like the bohemian associations of absinthe, so it kept the generic name and recipes continued to evolve independently of absinthe in the rest of the world, until the newly private producers in 1990s looked for ways to grow and noticed they could reconnect their product with the absinthe brand. 89.102.137.101 10:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes and no. Absinthe was most likely drunk in the czech republic before the ban as it was shipped around the world. However that painting is practically the only piece of evidence it ever made it to the czech republic. It's painter spent a time studying in france before returning to the czech republic, so it's not known if he brought his absinthe taste with him and was an oddity among those there.

A lot of Czech artists at the turn of the 20th century spent time in France, and obviously that's how absinthe got to Prague. Certainly there's more evidence than just the painting that self-styled Bohemians drank it - for example from Jaroslav Seifert (1901-1986): "Na básníkovu počest pívali jsme absint. Je zelenější než všechno zelené, a když jsme od stolku vyhlédli z oken, pod nábřežím tekla Seina." (the quote is from http://www.reflex.cz/Clanek13219.html, and they say it's from the poem Kavárna Slavia, in which case I doubt it's verbatim - it doesn't scan so well - but I think it establishes absinth wasn't drank just by Viktor Oliva).

Translation for the IP who says there's no reference Czech absinthe-drinking artists were francophiles: "To the poet's health we drank absinthe. It's greener than anything green, and when we looked up from the table out the windows, Seine was flowing under the quay.". The poet is Guillaume Apollinaire, who Seifert translated. If that isn't francophile, I don't know what is... 89.102.137.101 09:31, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't buy "francophile". Maybe it's just me, but it seems to make the Czechs sound diminutive to France. The Czech artists were great in their own right. In any case, why is it nesasary to call ALL Czech artists who drank absinthe Francophiles? Just because a single poem was translated by a very mainstream Czech artist, doesn't mean he was a francophile. There is plenty of talk about France in the rest of the article. Why is it nessasary to add this bit? It seems much more opinion than fact.

I don't really understand what you mean by "diminutive", but to me it seems absolutely uncontroversial that many Czech artists of the First Republic looked up to France - especially the modernist poets. Whether that diminishes them is POV and, in my view, irrelevant to the subject of this article. To imply that Seifert's relationship with France is limited to "translating a single poem" is misleading, to put it mildly: he visited Paris in 1923 and translated not just Apollinaire (a book, Alcohols, not a single poem) but also Verlaine and other French poets. The on-line synopses (i.e. http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/jseifert.htm) note his early work has been "influenced" by Apollinaire; I don't have access to paper sources, but as far as I remember, Czech textbooks say the same thing. And it isn't just Seifert either - Vítězslav Nezval "frequently traveled to Paris, engaging with the French surrealists, forging a friendship with André Breton and Paul Eluard". František Halas, having visited France in 1925, wrote after the Munich agreement: "sweet France, proud Albion - and we loved them". See http://www.souvislosti.cz/303/bednar.html for more examples. I'm adding "francophile" just to summarize the referenced article (which, granted, doesn't use the word) and convey the meaning of the Seifert's quote above - that they didn't drink absinthe because it tasted great but because it reminded them of France/Paris. It also points to a possible import route of absinthe to Czech lands - it isn't definite, but still readers can form their own conclusions about how it got there. 89.102.137.191 15:00, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

To add a comment, I think saying they spent time in france or looked up to france is important but francophile does have a condecending tone to it (something that doesn't appear to be on purpose). -- Ari 15:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm not a native English speaker, but I would have thought that while "francophile" can have negative connotations (especially in current American usage :-) ), it doesn't have to - i.e. Wiktionary defines it simply as "One who loves France, the French people, or French culture". I see all top Google hits use it in a positive sense. Anyway, what alternatives would you prefer? "Inspired by French artistic developments?" 89.102.137.191 12:55, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Ari x and the anon poster. There is no need for this word. I am removing francophile and inserting "some of which had an affinity for France"

However the actual claims are that czech absinth is a variation of absinthe, that it became extremely popular in the czech republic after its ban in france and that the czech absinth products today are a copy of that original recipe. So far not a single piece of evidence has appeared supporting that view and the story appears fabricated. -- Ari 14:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not claiming that - I'm just saying there is a Czech tradition of absinthe drinking (even if it was/is just a couple of would-be decadents) and the article should mention it. I notice that the Absinthe Drinker picture is already in Wikimedia - couldn't it be used in the section?

There do appear to be others but I'm not sure if they were considered normal or eccentric artists. A mention of them is a good idea. I didn't know that image was at wikimedia, perhaps its inclusion in the popular culture page would be good. -- Ari 15:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, they were poets - I don't know how normal should that be considered, :-) but for a poet, Seifert was as mainstream as they come. In 1920s, his circle pretty much wrote the book of Czech modernist poetry. I agree that literary references are no proof of mass appeal. As for the picture placement, Absinthe in popular culture already has Degas, while Czech, or Bohemian, absinth is pictureless... So I'd propose to replace the second paragraph with:

Absinthe has been drank in Czech lands (then part of Austria-Hungary) since the turn of the 20th century, notably by francophile Czech artists frequenting Prague's Cafe Slavia. Its wider appeal is uncertain. Contemporary Czech producers claim absinth has been produced in the Czech Republic since the 1920s, and that their brands use the same eighty-year-old recipes (i.e. in case of the Hills company, "98% the same"), but there is no independent evidence to support these claims.[5] Since there are currently few legal definitions for absinthe, producers have taken advantage of its romantic associations and psychoactive reputation to market their products under a similar name. Many Bohemian-style producers heavily market thujone content, exploiting the many myths and half-truths that surround thujone even though none of these types of absinth contain enough thujone to cause any noticeable effect.

OK, I've updated the section - now for the recipe... There actually is a reference connecting traditional Czech absinth to contemporary brands - Hills Absinth at [12] quotes Jan Werich reminiscing about drinking absinth in Cafe Slavia (some time in 1922 or 1923, apparently for the first and last time): "...it became opalescent, such an opalescent liquid - a bit like Odol. You know, for the teeth. If you brush your teeth. I hope so. Tasted like that, too." Tasting like mouthwash since 1920s! :-) I have to think how to integrate that... 89.102.137.191 09:56, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Interesting, I'll look into it. However the fact that it became opalescent (something bohemian absinth doesn't do) suggests he was drinking absinthe, which isn't disputed history and is not a connection to traditional czech absinth. --Ari 13:38, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, so the bohemian tradition among artists and wannabe artists exists, but the actual recipe is doubtful - I think we have a consensus here.

Although I also note that the louche could have been simulated by antimony trichloride (now removed from the recipe to make it conform to food-safety rules), so your addition of "with anise" to the historical overview seems too specific... 89.102.137.191 12:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Yep that's the consensus. People in czech land most likely drank absinthe (if nothing more than as a rare novelty) but that todays bohemian products have anything to do with what was drank almost 100 years ago and the story that an army got hooked on it (oddly mirroring what happened in france) is questionable and lacks any evidence.

Hmm, I'm not familiar with the story, but there's a Czech film (from 1964, by Martin Frič), A star called Wormwood, about some hard-drinking soldiers at the end of WWI. The title is a biblical reference, so I'm not sure whether there's any absinthe in the story (internet synopses, irritatingly enough, never specify *what* the characters are drinking), but couldn't that be the source? 89.102.137.191 19:21, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

It would be interesting but not the best source as movies aren't always accurate. The best evidence (and what many would be interested in) would be period bottles, labels, advertising posters or pamphlets, sales information like invoices, recipes etc. If it existed the most important part would be if it was considered a different 'style' of absinthe and what its connection with the french drink was or if the Hills company or others created a bitters that was later renamed 'absinth' (which is reasonable although no evidence exists for that theory either). --Ari 19:46, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not bringing it up to confirm the story, but to cast doubt on it - a filmmaker reaching for absinthe in a story of self-destruction has of course very little to do with real-world usage... I'm not that suprised there's no physical evidence; you have to understand that in Communist Czechoslovakia in 1950s, keepsakes of capitalist society could get you arrested. Still, many people took the risk, but they took it for important stuff, i.e. banned books, conceivably Hill's family recipes and such, not random promotional junk... There could be something in museums (local, or distillery companies', or artist's possessions somebody's bothered to collect), but AFAIK nobody's been interested enough to do professional (that is, with a budget) historical research... Personally I believe those recipes were for substitutes marketed as absinthe and that nobody attempted the market segmentation until 1990s, but that's just speculation... As for the bitters, you might be interested in Becherovka, drank in Czech lands since before absinthe and considerably more popular - I've never understood the popularity and I'm not qualified to say how similar it is to Bohemian absinth, but you can try it yourself. :-) 89.102.137.101 16:40, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Although it is possible the louche could have been completely simulated there is no evidence of any absinthe without anise (it's main defining ingredient) and antimony trichloride was most liked used an an enhancer to cover up low quality herbs. Similar to today where some manufactuers use large amounts of star anise in place of good quality green anise or fennel to enhance the louche of their product (star anise will more easily create a louche than green anise or fennel). --Ari 16:19, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Authorative sources

The source given for the fire-ritual is a forum post by Alan Moss (who posts here as well) who has knowledge from and contact with the Hills company, there is also no historical evidence of the fire-ritual. I've heard anecdotal evidence of absinthe being set-onfire inbetween the ban and revival (as is expected someone would do with any high proof liquor) but it was in the 90s that it was suggested as the "traditional" way to prepare the drink. --Ari 18:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

A forum post is not an authoritative source of course. --Lysy^talk 09:45, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia says a bulletin board post isn't acceptable specifically because we don't know who posted it, however in this case we do. I don't see why a source should be invalid just because of the medium the person decided to use. However if you would like me to add another source there is this one WS On Fire and Absinthe that provides a little bit of information (using web archive because the current frames don't allow direct linking) or FV What about setting the sugar on fire?. --Ari 16:19, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I was primarily concerned that Alan Moss was professionally involved in absinthe commercial market as Hills competitor, therefore his opinion potentially could be not neutral. However I understand that this was not the case. Thanks. --Lysy^talk 17:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Missing Citation

The second to last sentance in the first section claims: "Modern evidence shows it to be no more dangerous or psychoactive than ordinary alcohol." Where is the citation?

Although some people keep adding a citation needed, one isn't as the rest of the article, especially the "controversy" section includes citations. -- Ari 23:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

My take on the medical literature cited is that while there is medical evidence, none of it specifically rules out negative effects of the drugs on humans, and the gap parallels to the lack of research on Thalidomide in the 60's and 70's. In that case the drug was widely used around the world (and notably restricted in the US) despite a lack of negative health effects found in mice studies--it turned out that the drug affects humans in distinctly different ways than mice (the fact that it has sleep-inducing and tranquilizing affects in humans not present in animal studies was a clue that the medical community didn't pick up on). Similarly, since studying psychoactive affects of a drug using solely mice studies is going to miss potential effects that absinthe has on higher-brain functions.

I think the currently cited studies can be summed up as follows: 1) At least some of the original research that caused the 'absinthe scare' was flawed, 2) current absinthe production is within EU limits (which holds the implicit assumption that if it is legal in many contries that the health affects must be minor or non-existant...see above) and 3) that studies of mice show that the lethal dose (for mice) would not be consumed before the mice consume a lethal level of alcohol (also see above). A final gap in the research is that there are no longitudinal studies--health affects, such as cancer from secondhand smoke, often take decades to manifest themselves.

Disproving studies, such as the reaction-time study is not enough to say there aren't health affects. Instead, we should say that the effects are unknown but assumed (at least by legalizing countries) to be minor or nonexistant until there is a medical consensus on the topic. Antonrojo 20:47, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

1) You say "at least some of the original research... was flawed" I am curious what studies were accurate and if you can explain why? Every study I have seen was flawed or not a study at all but hearsay.

I'm referring to this specific summary of 'early research' on thujone: "supposed ill effects of the drink were blamed on that substance in 19th-century studies. Many of these studies were flawed, such as a study by Dr. Magnan in 1869 who exposed a guinea pig to large doses of pure wormwood oil vapor and another to alcohol vapors." When you say all studies are flawed, do you mean only the studies that showed negative health and psychoactive effects...if you mean all studies than the most we can say is that absinthe is thought to be harmless (ideally with some sort of historical overview article of changing public/medical opinions on the subject). Antonrojo 15:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

When I said all studies I have seen were flawed I was originally talking about the pre-ban studies on the dangers of absinthe. However that could easily be extended to beliefs showing the health effects of absinthe (such as the belief ethanol procured through grape or wine spirits was beneficial to a persons health where as the ethanol procured through corn or grain was detrimental to a persons health). It could also extend up to the end of the 20th century, such as studies in the 70's which erroneously linked thujone to THC. Only recently are we seeing any valid studies on absinthe and thujone. Antonrojo 15:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

2) Interesting bit about thalidomide however as it stands there is no evidence thujone is dangerous in quantities found in absinthe. Thujone is consumed everyday in much larger amounts than in absinthe (something I should clarify in the article) from a number of sources that were widely ignored because they weren't part of the scare. We haven't seen any issues with that consumption. There is zero evidence that suggests absinthe is any more dangerous than any other alcoholic beverage.

The reason I brought up that example was that very similar findings occured for thalidomide--for example NO lethal dose of the drug for mice could be found and the health effects in humans took time to manifest themselves. Adding cites showing that larger doses of thujone over time haven't had detrimental health effects would help. Of course, it would be much better to have research focused specifically on absinthe in humans. And though research may show that the 'active ingredient' (thujone) is apparently harmless, there may be specific substances or chemical changes introduced in the absinthe production process (one site lists methanol, nutmeg and other ingredients as potential psychoactives along with a few interesting case studies of Van Gogh: http://www.obscure.org/~vlad/gothic/absinthe.html). There have been many cases in chemistry and pharmacuticals where combining known-safe substances created unexpected results.

I could repeat the citation (i think there is one) of thujone concentration in common sage when I add the information that thujone in consumed by a large number of people from other herbal sources such as sage. There is very little research of absinthe on humans because it has been banned, and both detrimental effects and thujone's role have been assumed for many years without evidence. The herbs used in absinthe are used in many other products and have been seen as safe in the doses found in absinthe. Wormwood is really the only understudied herb. Methanol would be of no concern when dealing with commercial products today and the nutmeg added wouldn't be enough to cause effects (anymore than is found in many other cooking recipes). I would recommend the sites listed at the bottom of the article over the aging usenet FAQ. As we know proper absinthe is not hallucinogenic I think we can rule out that as a specific cause of Van Gogh's possible illness.

I think it is generally obvious that something that appears safe is considered safe until found not to be, so I'm not sure "effects are unknown but assumed (at least by legalizing countries) to be minor or nonexistant until there is a medical consensus on the topic" needs to be added to the absinthe page anymore than the Whiskey or Chartreuse pages. The only difference is those beverages haven't had a false stigma that has stuck around in peoples heads. That line seems to imply that there is something too the old studies that has still stuck around today (ignoring dangerous additives) which is untrue. -- Ari 16:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure that stigma, in part due to assocation between the drug and libertines has something to do with the negative view that people have had of absinthe. At least historically it appears that the type of absinthe produced did have negative health effects beyond what would be expected from simple alcoholism although that is debatable. In any case, since these health affects were widely assumed and most people aren't aware of modern evidence to the contrary, I think that modern medical evidence showing a lack of negative health effects should be presented along with a clear statement of gaps in the researech. This is useful at least from a 'myth busting' perspective. In the same way, despite strong evidence and a near universal medical consensus that THC is not addictive and has few health or psychoactive affects, readers should have evidence to back up that claim because many readers will come to the article with expectations to the contrary. An unsourced statement that absinthe (or THC) has few negative health affects will probably cause this crowd to stop reading the article, assuming bias. Antonrojo 17:02, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Poorly produced absinthe did have dangerous effects however I don't think that should be mentioned beyond a historical note anymore than added dangers of Gin should be talked about outside of the historical information about poorly produced bathtub gin during prohibition. Frankly it is unclear how many people who suffered from absinthism were heavy absinthe drinkers and how many were misdiagnosed

I don't see it as being unsourced or biased as the article expands on the section however perhaps the line should be changed to "there is no evidence suggesting absinthe is anymore dangerous than ordinary alcohol" which is accurate. -- Ari 17:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I should add, if it wasn't for the unsubstantiated claims of the early 1900s few would be worried about the dangerous effects of absinthe. To add that it is unknown as it hasn't been completely tested on humans seems a bit much and pointless unless the same line is added to every food item that hasn't had every chemical in it directly tested on humans (even those that have been indirectly tested through common use) It also makes it sound as if the original worry had some substance to it, which isn't correct. Although the thalidomide information is interesting I get the feeling it is the exception and not the rule. -- Ari 00:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

There are a few reasons why I would think that absinthe would warrant study above and beyond most food or drink and as a result be worth noting that the research hasn't been done. In not terribly large doses it is a poison (as is alcohol and a fair amount of food additives). In part due to the ban on the drink for a long period of time in most of the world, and in part due to the relatively small population of consumers of the drink, little modern research has been done regarding the drink. Think of the amount of health testing alcohol has received, or food dyes, or THC despite a fairly strong medical consensus that none of these have significant negative (if really any) health effects when consumed in moderation. In fact, I'm somewhat surprised that the producers of the drink haven't funded some level of research similar to the medical marijuana studies which debunked a lot of the 'pot scare' rhetoric. Antonrojo 01:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I would disagree with you about everything in absinthe except wormwood. All other ingredients are used in a number of other drinks as well as food items and have been studied, wormwood is the only ingredient lacking the same level of study. Although I don't think there is a large enough lack of information to add it to the lead, a further mention could be added to the controversy section discussing the research around absinthe. (There is an FDA study on thujone in progress because of worker exposure to the chemical but how long it will take to finish, if the methods used are accurate or how it pertains to absinthe has yet to be seen) -- Ari 01:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Clarification or Explanation of "LD50" in the section "Controversy"

In the section "Controversy" we find the following sentence: "Tests on mice show an LD50 of around 45 mg thujone per kg of body weight..." Because it is very possible that a reader might not know what "LD50" is, it might be useful to change the passage to something such as "... especially when the plant stems are used, where thujone content is the highest. A common test to gauge the toxicity of chemicals is "LD50" (Lethal Dose 50,) which is the dosage that proves fatal to 50% of the subjects receiving that dosage. Tests on mice show an LD50 of around 45 mg thujone per kg of body weight...." OR something like this: "... especially when the plant stems are used, where thujone content is the highest. Tests on mice show an LD50 of around 45 mg thujone per kg of body weight (FOOTNOTE 15), much higher than what is contained in absinthe. The high alcohol would kill a person many times over before the thujone became a danger. (LD50 (Lethal Dose 50) is a standard test to gauge the toxicity of chemical compounds, and is the dosage which proves lethal to 50% of the subjects receiving it.)" Well it is not that these are the only ways to work a definition into the article, as it could also, for example, be put it a footnote, but I think that it should be explained.

I agree. LD50 is jargon. Antonrojo 12:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Clarification of legality of consumption in US needed?

This is a response to the edit with the following summary: 'rvt, incorrect information. Purchase and consumption are seperate activities and one does not make the other illegal. It is also incorrect that vintage absinthe is considered unsafe'

This was the edit which clarified that while consumption in the US is legal, there are very few cases where it is (in other words de facto illegal): "although since private and commerical distillation as well as shipping of absinthe are illegal, the only way to legally consume absinthe in the US is to drink 'vintage absinthe' produced before the ban which is generally not considered safe^[1]"

My point here is that while consumption is not specifically prohibited in the US, in fact it is very difficult or unlikely for the following reasons:

absinthe was banned in the US in 1915
it is currently illegal to ship in absinthe and to distill it either as a company or otherwise
any absinthe in the US currently is either 'vintage', smuggled in or distilled illegally
vintage absinthe is rare and expensive (more so in the US than in Europe)

If I'm missing a possibility I'd be interested...I don't know the fine points or loopholes of the law. Regarding whether vintage absinthe is safe, at least it is likely that it doesn't comply with current EU restrictions :)Antonrojo 18:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Absinthe's ban in the US stems from two regulations, the FDA regulation on thujone and the customs regulation banning the importation of 'absinthe'. Thus importation of absinthe is not 'illegal' per-say, just not allowed, which is why those trying to import it only get their bottles confiscated as opposed to being arrested. The difference between importation and consumption or possession is important. Although it is against regulations for Bob to import absinthe, there is no law or regulation that says Fred can't have a glass of Bob's absinthe. (This is different from scheduled drugs where possession and importation are both illegal). There is a good chance a lot of the vintage being sold today (such ad Eduard pernod, Pernod fils, or Tarragona), as rare as it is to find, fits within EU regulations. Tests on vintage absinthe show thujone levels are within EU regulations and many top companies were known to use good quality all natural ingredients and proper distillation techniques. -- Ari 18:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

It is my understanding that Absinthe itself was NEVER banned in the U.S.A. until ALL liquor was banned under the 18th amndt. in 1920. Absinthe is available at several bars in New Orleans and I bring bottles back from Europe several times per year and have never had any troble with customs.

Absinthe was specifically banned in in 1915 before the 18th ammendment. That ban has since been superseded by FDA regulations. True absinthe is not legally available for sale in the US. Absente is often mistaken for actual absinthe and sold that way. Although Absinthe is banned, customs being busy with larger issues and agents not always knowing about the regulations makes seizures spotty. -- Ari 14:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

The US Customs and Border Patrol FAQ states the following on Absinthe importing: "The importation of Absinthe and any other liquors or liqueurs that contain an excess of Artemisia Absinthium is prohibited. Please contact the Food and Drug Administration at 301-594-3150, for further information on what percentage is allowable." Should the article be updated for this as the site also states at other places that it is not (at all) allowed to be imported? Matthew Stuckwisch 07:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The article already has a mention "According to U.S. Customs and Border Protection, "The importation of Absinthe and any other liquors or liqueurs that contain Artemisia absinthium is prohibited."[23] This runs contrary to FDA regulations, which allow Artemisia species in foods or beverages, but those that contain Artemisia species, white cedar, oak moss, tansy or Yarrow, must be thujone free.[24]" and as said there is no actually regulation that states what Customs claims. --Ari 14:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Smile

24.83.203.198 as well as Ari has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

I'm smiling at everyone reading this

Hausgemacht absinthe

I'm a native German speaker. Absinth is a male noun, thus it should be hausgemachter absinth. Hausgemacht absinthe is grammatically incorrect. Also, absinthe isn't a German word, while absinth is. Why not consistently use the spelling absinth in the article, as the English dictionary accepts both spellings?

My suggestion, change all uses of absinthe to absinth. Then change all hausgemacht absinth to hausgemachter absinth. JSTR 01:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Interesting info, although as a term in the 'underground' absinthe world as well as the connotations of absinthe vs absinth (see bohemian section) "Hausgemacht absinthe" is accurate in the english article even though it's improper German grammar. -- Ari 01:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Just for nitpicking from another native speaker - it would be Absinth (capitalized) in German, and if printed on a product label, the adjective "hausgemachter" would commonly be capitalized, too -> Hausgemachter Absinth. Actually, if you swap the words of the original spelling around ("Absinth, Hausgemacht") it'd be correct, too. (And boy am I happy I did not have to learn German at school. :-) ) 212.149.48.44 11:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Correct, it should be "Hausgemachter Absinth" or "Absinth, Hausgemacht." JSTR 18:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the point that Ari was trying to make is that "Hausgemacht" has become a common term in English speaking Absinthe communities, therefore it is now used as an English adjective, despite its obvious German root. AndrewT 18:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I concede. It's probably best the article remains unchanged with regard to this aspect. JSTR 19:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Toxicity

"Tests on mice show an LD50 of around 45 mg thujone per kg of body weight, much higher than what is contained in absinthe and the high amount of alcohol would kill a person many times over before the thujone became a danger" - this really needs a cite, since it's not self-evident from the discussion here.

Based on the numbers presented here, even going with a high-end concentration of 35mg thujone per litre and a low-end alcohol concentration, you'd have to drink about 60 times the LD50 of alcohol before managing to drink the LD50 of thujone. But LD50 isn't the end of the story; some things persist longer than others. If thujone is eliminated more slowly than alcohol, it would be quite possible for regular thujone consumption to reach dangerous levels without approaching the LD50 of alcohol. --Calair 06:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I would need to look it up but I believe the cited study that used mice gave a passing mention of elimination time, which appears to be rather quick. It also mentions ethanol can offer protective effects against LD100 doses of thujone. -- Ari 07:30, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Although it doesn't list the time it takes, it does say thujone is rapidly detoxified -- Ari 07:54, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Excellent article

I'd just like to say that this is an absolutely beautiful article, probably one of the best FAs at the moment. It got me reading the whole way, and contains a wealth of interesting information. Congratulations to all involved! Ronline ✉ 11:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Ditto. ed g2s • talk 14:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

This is by far one of the most outstanding articles among the entire Wikipedia, it's clarity, order and it's NPOV, are the qualities that I can list. Congratulations to all involved!
gerardonavarro 12:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

In movies

This is also drunk by several people in the comedy Eurotrip, and this movie also features a green fairy. Jon 13:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

That's mentioned in the Movies and TV section already. Thanks! Kafziel 13:56, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Pop culture

As with many Wikipedia articles with a "cultural impact" section, this one is starting to turn into a list of every song, painting, movie, book and post-card that ever mentioned absinthe. This is not actually encyclopedic, though it is exhaustive.

The tactic taken in many articles has been to write something like this:

Cultural impact

Main article: Absinthe in popular culture

The legacy of absinthe as a mysterious, addictive, and mind-altering drink continues to this day. Absinthe has been seen or featured in fine art, movies, video, music and literature. The modern absinthe revival has had an effect on its portrayal. It is often shown as an unnaturally glowing green liquid which is set on fire before drinking, even though traditionally neither is true.

Historical

Numerous artists and writers living in France during the late 19th and early 20th centuries were noted absinthe drinkers and featured absinthe in their works. These include Vincent Van Gogh, Manet, Guy de Maupassant and Toulouse-Lautrec. Later authors and artists would draw from this cultural well including Picasso, Oscar Wilde and Ernest Hemingway.

Modern

The mystery and illicit quality surrounding the popular view of absinthe has played into modern music, movies and television shows. These depictions vary in their authenticity, often applying dramatic license to depict the drink as everything from aphrodisiac to poison.

This is only an example, but note the lack of modern examples, and the avoidance of specific examples in the historical section. These specifics can go into the sub-article, so that the lack of someone's favorite example here doesn't tempt them (as strongly) to enter unnecessary trivia. -Harmil 14:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Good idea. Before the front page I did a slight clean up (not every song that says the word absinthe needs to be listed) and was planning to clean it up again once the edits return to normal, however a subpage is a better idea. It would also allow an expansion of historical examples without ballooning the article. -- Ari 14:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I'm going to go ahead and do it now - this is out of control! Kafziel 15:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Although I guess it's just formating differences, wouldn't an absinthe subpage like absinthe/popular_culture fit better, or is there wiki issues (like search) that would be affected? -- Ari 15:36, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Subpages like that aren't allowed in the main space, since this is content that is intended to be a permanent part of the encyclopedia. Kafziel 15:41, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Created an Absinthe category to handle it and its subarticles

Since Absinthe as a topic is apparently split into multiple articles, including Absinthe and Absinthe in popular culture, I created a new category Category:Absinthe. This way all the articles about Absinthe can be indexed under one category. The new category is a subcategory of Category:Alcoholic beverages and Category:Distilled beverages, meaning that "Absinthe" now appears as a subcategory on those instead of just a page.

Of course, if there's a dispute about the new category, feel free to say so, but it seemed like the logical way to index it. Meanwhile, I'll check for more Absinthe related articles to include. I recommend any discussion on the topic be handled under the Category talk page at Category talk:Absinthe Dugwiki 17:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

arak? ouzo?

Good article, but it leaves me wondering what the relationship of absinthe to the Arab drink arak, or the Greek ouzo might be. Is They both are flavored with artemesia and anise, and turn white when water is added.... sounds like the same thing. 216.40.234.80 08:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, Ouzo actually doesn't have artemisia in it. I can't comment on arak. Kafziel 19:27, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

As Kafziel said Ouzo and Arak don't normally use A.A. (although some brands may use it as some additional flavoring, I don't know individual brand ingredients). Anise is one of the main ingredients responsible for a louche (as well as fennel and star anise) so any liquor containing those will most likely turn cloudy white. As far as I know the drinks aren't connected beyond their similar ingredients. --Ari 19:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe there are various local recipes for Ouzo, depending on where in Greece it is being made, which may theoretically contain an Artemisia species. However, Arak contains only anise and wine spirit. I do believe, though, that all these drinks (including Turkish Raki, Italian Sambucca, and some lesser known Spanish / Portuguese liquors) are indicitive of a common Mediterranian tradition of anise liquors. Would be an interesting topic to research someday. AndrewT 18:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, there seem to be so many different anise flavored liquors I wonder if they all have a common ancestor (as it were) or common elixir that then spread to other areas.--Ari 18:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Great, thank you both. You cleared up something I have always wondered about. Sorry I forgot to sign my first post. 216.40.234.80 08:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Bottle images

As this is the main absinthe page, it's best to avoid images of individual bottles. A group of bottles is best to keep the page NPOV, individual bottles would go well on that brand's page (if it has one).

Sources

Although a few current sources are forum posts, those that are cited are either written by the owner of authoritative sites or those writing within their area of knowledge and match accepted sources and evidence.

Hausgemacht absinthe grammar

"Hausgemacht absinthe" is improper german. The correct grammar should be "hausgemachter absinth", or "Absinth, Hausgemacht". However because the term "Hausgemacht absinthe" is used in the english speaking absinthe community, the improper use is used on the main absinthe page.

To-do

The overall goal is to get the absinthe pages on wikipedia looking more like any other alcohol (with major companies and popular brand name product descriptions as well as the main absinthe page) and not just a novelty, especially with its increasing popularity.

Thoughts, comments, socks in a toaster? --Ari 19:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

One problem I do see is getting accurate NPOV information which would mean sources and cutting through marketing, as with many companies each one has their own version of reality. -- Ari 05:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Francois Guy too. Maybe add Doubs which is quite big in South Africa, and Xenta (?) which is big in Russia.

Online vendors account for c. 8% of global absinthe sales, so one could argue (as I tried before) that it is more relevant to have a list of all major bricks and mortar absinthe vendors. I would guess that both LCBO (Canada) and one or two UK supermarket groups sell more absinthe than any online vendor.

I understand about notability not being just a matter of sales, and Jade has hopefully helped the category with some good PR in the USA. I think that most of the brands quoted here would meet the press coverage criteria.

NPOV: yes, this may be difficult, but isn't it always? Alanmoss 14:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

IMO the amount of sales isn't what would make a vendor/company notable but what they have done for absinthe and their history with the drink. For example, I bet those that sell staro and L'or products are selling (or have in the past) more products than LdF, yet unless there is something I don't know I wouldn't consider them notable as they are just a retailer and could be selling books or juice, that their product happens to be absinth would only be notable if they were one of the only retailers around. If a brick and mortar has done something specific to absinthe then it's just as valid as any online retailer.

Although NPOV is always difficult it is more so with some companies as there are a number who have their own ideas of reality, or ideas that follow them around regardless, such as the reality distortion field that can follow the Jade products around or FGuys odd views on absinthe, or general claims made by companies that are little more than marketing the history of czech absinth for example. etc. -- Ari 15:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Here's a view (not mine of course):-

LDF have helped facilitate the re-emergence of 19th century absinthe with elitist pricing among the very small minority of drinkers who buy on the internet and who can afford to pay their prices.

In contrast, the Czech vendors have created a 21st century absinth that is much more versatile, that has more mass market prices, and with distribution in every channel. It is Czech absinth that has done more to stimulate the growth of the whole market.

Who has done more for the category?

Alanmoss 15:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Although the NPOV and inaccurate statements would need to go, both are accurate but it's comparing apples to oranges since we are talking about two different products with a similar name. Czech absinth helped start the new absinthe world but has done little since then for absinthe, on the other hand they have expanded their new product (with a similar nam)e) and companies that have tried to advance that product are notable. However in my example I was thinking of retailers that do nothing more than sell a product versus many of the companies listed which have taken an active role in improving the market. --Ari 15:56, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Understood (also IMO - I used IMHO above). While LDF etc may have more laudable aims (and even that could be considered a subjective view), some of the other "selling" companies have done more to grow the market in pure volume terms. Harrods and Wal-Mart are both listed in Wikipedia.

What do all the other contributors think? Ari and I probably don't want to monopolise the debate.

Alanmoss 16:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

When talking about the larger stores they should probably have their own page already such as tesco or LCBO and listing they sell absinthe on their pages is fine. I'm refering to making a new page about a company specifically for the absinthe category. If all that is added is "they sell absinthe [/end page]" or equivelent I don't think they are notable. I think eventually there might be pages for every brand out there but it's best to start off with the most notable and informative first instead of a flood of stub pages.

And yes, other peoples opinions would be great, I started the list and some information so that maybe others could start or add to these pages. You might consider checking the specific product or company names and then red-linking the pages on the list to make it easier to edit them (such as yesterday I changed "hills" to "hills liquere" (which I think is accurate) and then red linked it) -- Ari 16:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I've had a first go at La_Clandestine_Absinthe; interesting to note that Blackmint seems offline at the moment (actually for several weeks). Alanmoss 11:26, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

A Czech co-worker

See this user page. Maybe Chmee2 can help us with some local info and we can make sure that the Czech page is correct. Alanmoss 20:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

If he could provide additional information as well as evidence that would be great. Although so far it seems to be the same things. The history of czech absinth seems to be similar to the belief thujone is the "active ingredient" in absinthe, everyone believes it and repeats it as truth but no one knows why it is truth. The main source (and possibly only source) of the 1920's claims come from Radomil Hill, who has provided no evidence any of it is accurate. There is conjecture that the reason Radomil Hill's absinth is so much different from traditional absinthe of the past is because he created it, with very little understanding of traditional absinthe. -- Ari 22:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

US Legality

"It is not, however, illegal to possess or consume absinthe in the United States." Is there a source for this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.123.69.130 (talk • contribs) 09:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC).

Yes, the FDA and customs regulations are the only regulations about absinthe, neither make possession or consumption illegal. -- Ari 16:43, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Hopefully in the near future, it will become deregulated here in the U.S. as well... i've always wanted to try it. Coolgamer 22:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

NPOV: Wormwood society

Just to avoid other attempts at vandalisation, I changed the WS link entry to be cast-iron NPOV, just so that anyone tampering with it is sure to have the moral low ground. Indeed, some may argue (wrongly or rightly) about the WS mission (that's partly opinion), but not what its self-declared mission is. -- sixela.

Marilyn Manson

How in the hell can this be an FA when it is Marilyn Manson's favorite drink? You people are dumbasses--70.124.132.176 15:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, whenever a star I don't like drinks something, I imediately hate it, because I'm not a sheep like his followers. I hear Manson loves to breath too... -- Ari 15:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Man I hope that was sarcasm. HighInBC 15:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

But the article on breath is not an FA, so the comparison is not strictly relevant, Ari. Otherwise, a good answer. Alanmoss 17:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

That's only because the anit-Manson fans have kept it down. It's a conspiracy man. -- Ari 17:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Maybe our anonymous poster should look at the artices on DNA Repair and Arrested Development. Both are FA's, and both seem to be of particular relevance to the poster.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanmoss (talk • contribs) 17:37, 3 August 2006

Mixed

There is a restaurant in Ottawa, Canada, named "Absinthe" which serves cocktails mixed with absinthe. Is that common? Should it be mentioned in the article? --JGGardiner 17:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I would estimate that hundreds, if not thousands of bars in Canada serve cocktails that include absinth(e). Maybe not many called "Absinthe," but I am not sure that makes it notable. The Absinthe restaurants in Chicago and San Francisco do not serve absinthe officially.

There are definitely many thousands of bars in Europe serving absinthe cocktails, and there are probably 10 - 20 European bars called "absinthe," or the local language equivalent.

I have previously suggested it would be worthwhile to have a listing of Absinthe retailers but got shot down (politely). Alanmoss 07:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I see what I wrote was misleading. I meant to ask if that sort of use of the alcohol was common. Right now the article only mentions the process of preparing the drink by itself. I only meant to list the restaurant as an example. I certainly don't think that little place is notable. --JGGardiner 14:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

As an example, it's one of many hundreds in North America, and one of many thousands worldwide. If we knew that it was one of the top absinthe bars worldwide, it might be worth mentioning. Some bars and clubs in Europe are serving 20 - 30 bottles of absinthe every week (maybe 1000 drinks). If it's over that level, it would be notable and well worth citing. Alanmoss 14:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought that I was perfectly clear above but I'll say again. I wasn't suggesting that this restaurant might be notable. It was an example. I was suggesting that the use of absinthe in mixed drinks might be worth noting because right now the article only mentions the use of it alone. Thanks.

--JGGardiner 15:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's quite common to use absinthe in cocktails and I agree that it is worth a mention: sorry not to have read your second note properly. The Sazerac is one of the best known examples but there are another 30 or so (split between French and Bohemian styles) on the La Fée site http://www.lafeeabsinthe.com/cocktails.php

Absinthe cocktails are probably better known in the most highly developed absinthe markets, e.g. UK, Italy, Spain and Germany. I would guess that Americans are less likely to use absinthe in cocktails since absinthe is rarer there, and people may tend to view their absinthe a little more "protectively!" Alanmoss 15:36, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

What Alan said. There are a number of cocktails using absinthe, some are good, some are not, and some are there just to hide the horrible flavor of bad absinth...e.

Alan, perhaps the americans you talk too buy better quality absinthe than usual and thus don't see a reason to use it in test-cocktails. :-)

To answer the original question, I think a 'cocktails using absinthe' page should be made either here or in Wikibook bartending. Note, check with wiki organization standards, at one point I believe recipes were being moved over to wikibook, but I see a number still on wikipedia. -- Ari 17:50, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. And no worries Alan. I was thinking maybe a line with "also used in cocktails such as..." with maybe another saying that is considered more of a gimmick by connoisseurs. A lot of foods have those "also used in" sections. But you're the absinthe guys so this is really more of a suggestion. Thanks. --JGGardiner 18:49, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

It should be noted not all of them are gimmicky, there are a number of traditional cocktails made with absinthe, however there is a good chance many bars aren't serving them. Going for the more gimmicky 'absinthe and redbull' (like the popular Jager and redbull) shooter, or other drink that treats absinthe as nothing more than high proof liquor to get people drunk quicker or that can be set on fire. Which is probably a good reason to increase awareness of real cocktails using absinthe. -- Ari 19:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Sugar contradiction

In the Introduction the fact that absinthe does not contain added sugar is mentioned. However, few lines below, when describing the use of the spoon, the author mentions the dissolving of added sugar. The difference between those two additions is explained (implicitly) somewhere in the body of the text. Shouldn't the distinction be clear from the very beginning of the article?Glaukon 20:14, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't seem like a contradiction to me. I like to eat my steak with salt and pepper. That doesn't mean the steaks come from the butcher with salt and pepper already in them. Many people put sugar in absinthe after they've poured it, but that doesn't imply that it comes with it. Adding sugar is up to personal preference, just like adding vermouth to vodka or mint leaves to rum. I don't find it confusing. Or maybe I misunderstand your suggestion? Kafziel 21:45, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you're right and for most readers it would also appear as perfectly fine statement. My point is that there is an equivocation in the usage of the expresion "added sugar". I mean, I don't know a lot about Absinth(e) and I get confused while reading. Once, author is stating that there is no sugar added while few lines below he/she connects the usage of the spoon with added sugar. I'm not an expert in Absinth(e) spoons either so I started to think about the author's intentions. All was disambiguated in the body of the text -- then i realized that this second addition refers to the sugar which is put on the spoon. I think that it should be dismabiguated at the beginning. Hope that now I made myself clear.Glaukon 12:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I made a small change in the introduction. I hope that helps. Kafziel 12:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Now it seems fine for me.Glaukon 16:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

NPOV

"Besides being unpleasant to drink and a pale impression of authentic distilled absinthe, ..." -- unsigned by 65.105.228.241

I see nothing POV about that, as stated in the article soaking wormwood in alcohol makes it extremely bitter and bad tasting, and is something which is not close to real absinthe. -- Ari 17:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Umm, "unpleasant" and "pale impression" are still qualitative words, not quantitative, whatever the most common opinion might be.--24.22.147.202 01:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

If you consider absinthe to require steam or alcohol distillation then you are right, it isn't a "pale impression" but simply not absinthe. As for unpleasant. what would you suggest? I find it to be generous in the description. Soaking wormwood in alcohol produces an extremely bitter drink that can easily be undrinkable. -- Ari 02:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

The phrase "pale impression" isn't even in the article anymore. That was changed a while back. My only thoughts about the word "unpleasant" is that it instead might be more appropriate to say that the resulting drink is far more bitter than absinthe. Bitterness is not subjective. Peridotmetal 04:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Absinthe Grades

In the article: "Historically, there were five grades of absinthe: ordinaire, demi-fine, fine, supérieure and Suisse (which does not denote origin), in order of increasing alcoholic strength."

I have read in many places that the different grades were quality based, not based on how strong the alcohol was. And in many of the old absinthe production books, the different is in the amount and what herbs are used. In fact, in "New Treatise on the Fabrication of Liquiorsone" by J. Fritsch it is stated: "The heads and the tails, that is to say the wormwood phlegms (the stuff left over from higher quality distillations), will be put aside, as we mentioned previously, for the manufacture of absinthes ordinaire."

So it seems that the article is either partially wrong, or just wrong. Maybe it was some kind of combination of herbs, quality, and alcohol percentage? Is there some citation for this? If, somehow, it is ONLY the alcohol percentage, maybe someone could add the percent range for each grade? -- Confused (24.16.34.239)

Both are correct, the wikipedia article just isn't complete. It should probably be added that the grades also deal with quality and herbs used as well as there was no set standard (more like guidelines). The alcohol percentage is related to quality in the sense that using the same recipe/distillate a bottle with more alcohol will also contain more oils. It's especially the case for vertes which require a certain alcohol percentage to keep the chlorophyll in solution. Low alcohol bottles would start to lose their coloring or require artificial coloring, thus not being as high a quality as higher alcohol bottles. -- Ari 16:05, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. However, alcohol percentage would be a poor was to judge the grade/quality of absinthe, would it not? A green absinthe at 68% could be much worse than a green absinthe at 62% depending on the contents, etc, no? In addition, many citations of absinthe from yesteryear have the color being more Olive or Yellow-Green color. I am not sure what my point is. Just some observations I guess. I think that whatever is stated regarding grades on this page will likely be used by the present and future absinthe industry, so getting a more difinitive definition of each grade would be very useful. -- (24.16.34.239)

A good point, I'll make some changes to add that it has to do with herbs as well as not being a hard standard. I don't think it was a quality grade as much as a classification of what someone might expect. A Suisse wouldn't be an artificially colored oil mix of just wormwood and anise for example. The color of a verte can range quite a bit, as light hits the absinthe the chlorophyll breaks down and turns brown (quite similar to what happens in leaves that fall off a tree) so everything from storage to the herbs used can effect the exact color. That is different from a verte with a low alcohol percentage, in that case the chlorophyll actually falls to the bottom of the bottle. -- Ari 21:20, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Any progress with a better listing of the grades? Such as an alcohol range, herbs used, etc? Exactly what would (Should) qualify an absinthe as Suisse? Supérieure?

I added a small addition to the article and will look into it more. There don't seem to be any standards set in stone. An example I can think of is computer or electronics naming. A companies "pro" line is often better than their consumer line, but there aren't any specific standards a "pro" line must meet. -- Ari 05:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I like the addition. I am sure there would be overlap with the different grades. Would an aficionado scoff at a Suisse that has 62% alcohol? A Supérieure? If an absinthe is distilled and colored naturally, but only 60% alcohol, would that still be a Suisse or Supérieure? Things like this will be helpful guides in the future.

Vote on spelling: English v. American

Lots of discussion of this elsewhere, but not on the page where it should be.

I'm English: I still vote for American spelling. It's been in American most of the time it's been here, the major contributors are American, and the main readers are American. Alanmoss 20:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

American. Ari x is by far the strongest contributer to the article, and it's been in AE for years (and was when it became a featured article). See my talk page for more discussion. Kafziel ^Talk 22:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Weak american english support. In generally we are talking about a couple "u"s however some terms are slightly different such as anise and aniseed, and anise is common across wikipedia (at least the articles I've visited). Also many of the contributors here use american english. I don't see any reason to change to british english. -- Ari 00:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment. Is anise vs. aniseed really a British vs. American English difference? If it is, and there's a likelihood of confusion, it might be a good idea to include both terms the first time anise is mentioned, for clarity's sake. However, all the dictionaries I checked seem to think that anise is the plant and aniseed its seed throughout the English-speaking world -- including the Oxford English Dictionary, which shows "anise" being used long before the Mayflower launched. —Cel ithemis 00:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's really a problem. The Wikipedia article is at anise; just like everything else here, if anyone doesn't know what anise is, they can click the link and see that a synonym is aniseed. Shouldn't be an issue. Kafziel ^Talk 00:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Also american. This is annoying. Why do people keep doing this? Is it something personal? What is the point of going through and trying to change everyone? Do a simple google search for "Color" and note the number of pages. Then do "colour". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.16.41.151 (talk) 20:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I vote for American because that's the way the article has been for a while. The major contributors have used Am En. And precisely not for the reason mentioned in the previous point. Cribananda 04:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Weak support for English wording style. While using this style intermittently throughout WP can be annoying, I think here it's called for because Absinthe use is primarily a European phenomena. Similarly, I'd expect articles about European countries to favor (favour?) the metric system over imperial measures. As a rule, as long as the style difference doesn't make it harder for either group to read the article I'd actually support inconsistent styles throughout an article since 1) with many editors some will see this style as 'correct english' and 2) there is no practical or WP policy basis to forbid them from doing so. Antonrojo 19:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment.' Hmm, perhaps this could lead to a compromise. I would like to keep "anise" since it's the spelling used in most absinthe literature (english and american) but wouldn't mind if the article was coloured with U's. -- Ari 03:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

This is NOT between British and American English. If it was I would not have a leg to stand on because obviously fewer people speak British English than American. However, most of the world's English-speaking population speak Commonwealth English. The comment was made that most Americans wouldn't know what "aniseed" was. Equally, I don't think I would've known what anise was, nor do I think many others would. Also, Reference 24 from the European Commission uses Commonwealth English. So the Reference would be incorrect unless it was in any other dialect besides that. And then we would have a problem with inconsistancy in the article. I vote for neither American or British English. I vote for Commonwealth English, if only for clarity's sake for the majority of the English-speaking world. Cjk91 18:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

The comment was also made that it doesn't matter whether people know what anise is, because they can just click the link to find out. And references don't need to use language consistent with the rest of the article. Kafziel ^Talk 18:12, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

That is the beauty of Wiki. Of course references don't need to be consistent, but why should they not be when it doesn't inhibit people's understanding of the article? In fact, as you know, I would argue that the widest-spoken dislect is preferable for an article that mentions no one English-speaking country in particular!

Evidently you would. But that's not how it works. See our guideline on the subject, here. The first reference is in French; does that mean the whole article should be in French, for consistency? Of course not. Kafziel ^Talk 19:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

While we are only really discussing one word I think the page is best left to the wording used to describe absinthe on most other english absinthe pages (including some of the largest around) which would be "anise." Cjk, is it possible you could leave the absinthe page alone until this conversation is over or do we need to get an admin/mod to protect the page or moderate or dole out warnings? These constant reverts are getting annoying and by ignoring this discussion you do nothing to help your position. Obviously some consensus and possibly admin action will need to be taken to stop these constant reverts. -- Ari 21:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Edit wars

Ok, whatever the spelling looks like at the time this is posted, please do not change it until this topic is closed. -- Ari 17:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

What makes you think that our "friend" will pay attention to this? The magic word "please?" Alanmoss 18:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, I think some people don't understand English (both UK and US) :-) Cribananda 18:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Nope, but it does set precedent that he doesn't appear to care to talk this out or what our opinions are and edits after 17:47 should probably be treated as vandalism. In which case the best solution would be to say Hi to an admin since revert arguing is going no where. -- Ari 18:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

He's still at it... Kafziel ^Talk 18:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

^ http://www.absinthebuyersguide.com/faq.html

[1] ttp://www.absinthebuyersguide.com/faq.html

[1]