Talk:Grey Goose (vodka)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

astroturfing?

Even the talk page reads like a PR piece — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.204.187.246 (talk) 01:55, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article used to be even more
WP:COI than it is now, hard though that is to believe. The truth is that GG is a cynically manufactured product with no cultural history, designed to fill a market niche populated by people with more money than sense. Everything else is PR puffery. --Ef80 (talk) 13:54, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply
]

That would be the normal method of disambiguating the vodka from other uses of Grey Goose. JesseRafe 04:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. Done. ProhibitOnions (T) 12:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality?

This article is pretty interesting, and the history section is informative. However, the paragraph talking about "perception of quality" seems pretty controversial, and isn't supported by the Freakanomics article cited as authority. Personally, I can taste a big difference between quality vodkas and store-brand cheapies. I'd also bet you're going to have a nasty hangover if you drink much of the cheap stuff. Thoughts?

Thoughts? My thoughts are only to wonder what your personal hangovers have to do with this article. Did a bunch of Grey Goose staff come along to edit the talk page as well as the article? Joe Garrick (talk) 09:31, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--68.0.181.173 (talk) 05:30, 19 December 2007 (UTC) Well speaking only from personal experience, I can say that drinking GG Vodka has never resulted in a Hangover when I have followed simple pre sleep procedures (a pre-sleep stomach purge, and a pint of water before sleep). All that I tend to have is a feeling of drunkeness the following morning, but a couple of Acetamenophen/Paracetamol and Ibuprofen in the morning has staved off the effects of hangover for the afternoon. All I can say is, I know when I wake up if I drank GG or something else the night before, waking up after GG is MUCH easier!--Davyboy79 (talk) 00:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My extensive personal research (inadmissible on WP of course) says that below 14 oz per day, grey goose is basically even with filtered water in terms of hangover production. 131.107.0.73 (talk) 22:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At least the phrase "perception of quality" is unproblematic: My interpretation is not "The price makes the drink taste better.", but "Naive buyers automatically assume that more expensive is better.". This a an extremely wide-spread trick, which is undoubtedly effective. (Wether it is also moral is another issue: The actual correlation between price and quality tends to be highly disputable.) This deception is one of the corner-stones of the luxury industry.94.220.249.208 (talk) 07:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia is allowed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NOT

There are nothing about trivia exactly there. Anything that could be connected to trivia is "Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics..." or "indiscriminate collection of information" subsections. Trivia presence on wikipedia is still in discuss.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Handling_trivia

So trivia is allowed. Furthermore these are trivias maybe for you but important information for me. This is a lifestyle product that has a very heavy impact on nightclub culture that differs it from about 99% of other vodkas and I want to know it. Can you tell what is triva or not? Probably you could cut off 4/5 of Casablanca movie article because they are trivias.--148.81.137.4 (talk) 20:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Unless and until you can show, with
reliable sources, that this information is notable--as in widely covered in mainstream sources--it simply does not belong. → ROUX  22:21, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

File:GreyGoose LOrange750.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:GreyGoose LOrange750.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 28 December 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review

deletion guidelines
before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is
    fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try
    Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --

talk) 17:57, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Wheat ; isn't it hard wheat that is best for bread? (soft for cakes) Daiyounger (talk) 14:59, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grey Goose (vodka). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:32, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grey Goose (vodka). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:44, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Company History - "Champagne limestone"

Hello Wikipedians,

I noticed the Company History section references "Champagne limestone" in the second paragraph, second sentence. I've never seen this particular term used before and a quick Google search appears to indicate the phrase may only be used as a color description (for tiles, paint etc.) I believe what the original author may have meant is that the water is sourced from limestone-filtered springs, similar to the limestone soil in Champagne. But the Champagne reference doesn't seem to add value to this explanation, so I'd suggest rephrasing this sentence as follows:

"The water used to produce the vodka comes from natural, limestone-filtered springs in Cognac, France while the wheat is sourced from farms in Picardy, France."[1][2]

Please let me know if anyone has thoughts on this proposed change. Thank you,

--DebateisGreat (talk) 20:40, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.forbes.com/sites/katiebell/2015/02/03/the-secret-to-grey-goose-and-making-the-worlds-best-vodka/#668352a72831. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  2. ^ https://vodka-guy.com/a-history-of-grey-goose-vodka/. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Requested move 20 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Rough consensus to move. This was extremely difficult to determine consensus, but taking into the weight of some arguments per

WP:IDONTLIKEIT, therefore cannot be weighted as strongly as policy based arguments. Overall, there's a majority of support !votes, and some of the oppose !votes are weaker.(non-admin closure)  – CityUrbanism 🗩

The result of the move request was: No consensus as to whether the usage of "Grey Goose" to refer to grey geese is enough to muddy the waters and make impossible a primary topic. (non-admin closure) Red Slash 07:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]


– A brief discussion above appears to have precipitated the move to the current title, with the current

Grey goose). I believe Grey Goose (vodka) is the primary topic, and the case for Grey goose (Anser (bird)) can be best handled with a hatnote. Also note the "Reader Navigation" on the WikiNav data which appears to show people coming from the Anser (bird) page just to click-thru to the Grey Goose (vodka) page. —Locke Coletc 20:18, 20 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 22:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisting comment: Relist to allow addition discussion of whether the vodka is primary for
Grey goose BilledMammal (talk) 22:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 10 April 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: WithdrawnLocke Coletc 15:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]


– A brief discussion above appears to have precipitated the move to the current title, with the current

WP:DIFFCAPS is also relevant to this discussion, and supports the rationale for moving. For this requested move, I am requesting only an administrator close the discussion. —Locke Coletc 16:12, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.